> 


N 


> 

f^ 

^ 

H 

1 
1 

'■ft'.. 

ERCHIA  DE  DEME   OF  ATTICA 


by 


CLARENCE   H.   YOUNG 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT  LOS  ANGELES 


•i!|B3  'UOJ>|DOJS 
■sojg  pjofXeQ 


ERCHIA 


A    DEME    OF    ATTICA 


CLARENCE    H.   YOUNG 

A.  M.,  Columbia  Coi.lkgh,  1889 


A    DISSERTATION  SUBMITTED  IN   PARTIAL   FULFILMENT  OF  THE 
REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHIL- 
OSOPHY IN    THE   UNIVERSITY  FACULTY   OF 
PHILOSOPHY,  COLUMBIA    COLLEGE 


NEW   YORK 
&    J.    B.    YOUNG     &     CO 

Cooper  Union,  Fourth  Avenue 
1891 


ERCHIA 


A    D  E  Ai  E    OF    ATTICA 


CLARENCE    H.  YOUNG 

A.  M.,  CoLU.MUiA  College,  1S39 


A    DISSERTATION  SUBMITTED  IN   PARTIAL   FULFILMENT  OF   THE 
REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE   OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHIL- 
OSOPHY IN    THE    UNIVERSITY  FACULTY    OF 
PHILOSOPHY,  COLUMBIA    COLLEGE 


NEW   YORK 
E.     &    J.    B.    YOUNG     &     CO 

Cooper  Union,  Fourth  Avenue 
1891 


E6V8 


ERCHIA,   A   DEME    OF    ATTICA. 


ADDENDA  ET  CORRIGENDA, 

P.  59.     Between  Theudote  and  Thrason  insert 
Thoukleides,  ii.  848. 

Owing   to   an    error    by  which   the    inscription, 
C.  I.  A.,  ii.  1047,  was  assigned  to  the  end  of   the 
third  century  instead  of  the  second,  the  following 
corrections  are  rendered  necessary : 
P.  42,  1.  16.     Read  "six"  for  "seven." 
P.  43.     Substitute  for  lines  12-20  the  following  : 

"Of  these  two  generations  no  record  has  been 
preserved.     If,  however,  our  hypotheses  be  correct, 
this  grandchild  in  180  at  the  age  of  forty-eight  could 
have  had  a  son  at  least  twenty  years  old." 
Omit  foot-note  2. 
P.  44.     After  line  9  insert  the  following  : 

"The  son  of  this  athlete  is  no  doubt  to  be  identi- 
fied with  Diodes,  son  of  Dromeas  who  is  named 
in  a  list  of  noble  men  (C  I.  A.,  ii.  1047)  that  belongs 
to  the  latter  part  of  this  century  or  the  beginning 
of  the  first." 
1.  10.  Read  "six"  for  "seven." 
P.  64.     Make  the  following  alterations  and  additions  : 

4.  Unknown. 

5.  Unknown.  / 

7.   Dromeas,  about  150  B.C.  Drofneas 

C.  I.  A.,  ii.  445. 

8.  Diokles,  125-90  B.  c. 
C.  I.  A.,  ii.  1047. 

Note. — The  author  takes  this  opportunity  of  announcing  that  he  is  at  present 
preparing  similar  papers  upon  the  following  demes  :  Gargettus,  Halae  (both  denies  of 
this  name),  Halimus,  and  Paeania. 


2053U5 


ERCHIA. 


"  Man  glaubte  Attika  vorzugsweise  in  Athen  suchen  zu  mues- 
sen.  Unci  doch  ist  die  Vervvaltung  and  Gcschichtc  der  Stadt  mit 
dcr  ihicr  Landgaue  unzertrcnnlich  verbundcn." — Dr.  Milch- 
HOEFER,  Sit/.ungsbcr.  der  Berliner  Akad.,  1887,  p.  41. 

npHE  careful  consideration  of  two  distinct  ele- 
■"■  ments  is  absolutely  essential  to  an  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  Attica.  On  the  one 
hand  the  history  of  Athens  itself  claims  our  atten- 
tion, on  the  other  that  of  the  country  denies  re- 
quires careful  investigation.  The  former  has  long 
been  a  subject  for  the  research  of  scholars,  but 
the  latter  has  been  far  too  generally  neglected. 
And  yet  the  store  of  Attic  inscriptions,  already 
large  and  ever-increasing,  renders  investigation 
in  this  field  more  and  more  profitable,  the  results 
attained  more  and  more  exact.  In  the  hope,  then, 
of  adding  slightly  to  our  knowledge  of  these 
country  denies  the   writer  was  encouraged  to  un- 

3 


dertake  the  investigation  of  which  the  results  are 
embodied  in  the  present  paper. 

Hesychius,  Stephanus  of  Byzantium,  and  Dio- 
dorus  as  cited  by  Harpocration,  all  record  the 
fact  that  the  cleme  Erchia  belonged  to  the  Aegeid 
tribe.  The  truth  of  their  statements,  moreover, 
has  been  fully  attested  by  the  evidence  of  inscrip- 
tions. But  whence  the  name  Erchia  itself  is  de- 
rived would  be  unknown,  were  it  not  for  the 
words  of  Stephanus  of  Byzantium.  This  writer, 
who  uses  the  form  'Epxtd^^  states  that  the  deme  re- 
ceived its  name  ''■v^o  'Ep^lov  rod  ^evlaavTO<;  A/jfj-rj- 
Tpav.  Although  the  tradition  to  which  these 
words  allude  is  not  mentioned  by  other  writers, 
it  is  readily  connected  with  the  well-known  myth 
of  Demeter.  According  to  the  legend  current  in 
Attica,  after  the  abduction  of  Core  the  goddess 
mother  visited  that  country  and  taught  Triptole- 
mus  the  art  of  sowing.^  At  this  time  also,  to  cite 
the  story  that  Pausanias  tells,  she  was  hospitably 
received  in  the  home  of  Phytalus,  to  whom  in 
gratitude  she  gave  the  fig-tree.^  To  this  sanie  pe- 
riod, no  doubt,  the  event  mentioned  by  Stephanus 
is  to  be  referred.       Herchius,   then,   from   whom 

'  For  a  discussion  of  the  various  forms  of  this  name  compare  Appendix, 
Note  I. 

^  Pans.,  I.  14.  2-3.  2Paus. ,  I.  37.  2. 


the  dcmc  was  named,  was  one  of  those  who  enter- 
tained the  g-oddess  in  her  wanderings  upon  earth. 

This  leofend,  furthermore,  has  an  additional  in- 
terest  in  its  bearing-  upon  the  location  of  the 
deme.  The  question  as  to  the  site  of  Erchia  was 
until  within  the  last  few  years  in  an  unsettled 
state.  Giovanni  Lami,  it  is  true,  in  his  edition  of 
the  complete  works  of  J.  Meursius,  published  at 
Florence  in  1741,  locates  this  deme  to  the  south- 
east of  Athens,  nearly  equidistant  from  that  city 
and  the  coast.  Ross,  in  his  Demen  von  Attika, 
dismisses  the  subject  with  the  curt  remark,  "  Site 
unknown  "  ;  Leake  says  nothing,  and  others  are 
equally  reticent.  Hanriot  is  inclined,  from  the 
story  of  Herchius  and  Demeter,  to  place  the  deme 
near  the  Sacred  Way.'  The  exact  site  he  would 
assign  to  it  is  on  the  eastern  border  of  the  Eleu- 
sinian  plain,  near  the  lakes  called  Rhiti  and  the 
bay  of  Eleusis,  in  the  vicinity  of  the  ruins  at  St. 
Stephani. 

In  this  state  of  uncertainty  the  matter  remained 
until  1887.  In  that  year  Dr.  Milchhoefer  was  led 
by  inscriptional  evidence  to  fix  upon  the  jMagula 
hill,  to  the  southwest  of  the  modern  village  of 
Spata,  in  the  Mesogaea,  as  the  site.    The  reasons 

'  His  reasons  are  stated  at  length  in  his  Reclierches  sur  la  topographic 
des  denies  de  I'Attique,  pp.  112-113  and  p.  226. 


that  led  him  to  form  this  opinion,  though  not  con- 
clusive, are  sufficiently  strong  to  warrant  the  ac- 
ceptance of  this  site,  unless  future  investigation 
prove  his  views  incorrect.' 

Furthermore,  the  legend  in  regard  to  Herchius 
accords  fully  as  well  with  this  view  as  with  the 
supposition  of  Hanriot.  From  the  Homeric 
Hymns  we  learn  that  Demeter  landed  at  Thori- 
cus  and  proceeded  thence  to  Eleusis.  Now  from' 
Thoricus  toward  the  west  two  routes  are  open 
to  the  traveller.  On  the  one  hand,  he  may 
journey  across  the  saddle  of  the  southern  spur  of 
Hymettus  and  proceed  along  the  western  coast. 
On  the  other,  he  can  travel  through  the  Meso- 
gaea,  pass  around  the  northern  end  of  Hymettus 
and  thus  enter  the  plain  of  Athens  from  the  north. 
The  latter  route,  passing  as  it  does  directly  from 
the  one  plain  into  the  other,  though  somewhat 
the  longer,  is  yet  the  easier  of  the  two.  Natural- 
ly enough,  then,  we  may  conceive  that  the  wor- 
ship of  Demeter  would  have  followed  this  course 
in  its  progress    toward  Eleusis.      In   view,  too,  of 

'  His  main  reasons  are  the  following  :  i.  Erchian  sepulchral  inscriptions 
outside  of  Athens  itself  have  been  found  only  at  or  near  Spata.  2.  The 
number  of  such  inscriptions  found  at  this  place  is  from  twelve  to  sixteen  per 
cent  of  the  entire  number  known.  3.  No  other  denie  name  has  been  found 
near  Spata,  except  in  a  single  inscription. 

His  complete  argument  for  this  site  will  be  found  in  the  Sitzungsbericht 
der  Berliner  Akademie,  1887,  p.  54  sqq. 

6 


the  commcuulinor  position  of  the  hills  about  Spata, 
overlooking  as  they  do  the  plain,  a  local  tradi- 
tion might  readily  have  arisen  that  hither  the 
goddess  mother  turned  from  her  journey  in  search 
of  refreshment  and  of  rest. 

Leaving  now  this  question,  we  must  pass  troni 
the  enchanted  region  of  mythology  to  the  less 
pleasing  but  more  productive  one  of  history  and 
of  fact.  Here,  in  the  lack  of  reference  to  the 
deme  collectively,  we  are  forced  to  the  considera- 
tion of  individual  Erchians,  in  the  hope  that  from 
their  lives  we  may  gain  some  knowledge  of  the 
position  held  by  the  deme  itself  in  the  Attic 
world.  These  men  it  has  seemed  advisable  to 
consider  under  two  distinct  heads,  according  as 
our  knowledge  of  them  is  obtained  from  literary 
or  from  inscriptional  sources. 


ERCHIANS  IN  LITERATURE. 

The  most  famous  Erchian  of  whom  literature 
records  the  name  is  that  son  of  Gr^llus  whom 
Gibbon  calls  the  "  sage  and  heroic  Xenophon  ".' 
Of  his  position  in  the  Greek  world,  as  well  in  the 
turmoil    of  public   life  as  in    the    quiet  paths    of 

'  Dio-    Laert.,  Vit.  rinl..II.6.  I. 
7 


literature  and  of  philosophy,  this  paper  need  not 
speak.  It  need  but  point  to  the  eloquent  testi- 
mony that  bygone  ages  have  borne  to  the  charm 
of  his  writings  and  to  the  greatness  of  his  abili- 
ties. 

The  subject  of  his  banishment,  on  the  contrary, 
in  that  it  bears  upon  the  question  of  his  sons' 
status,  requires  some  consideration  at  our  hands. 
He  was  banished  from  his  native  land,  as  Dio- 
eenes  Laertius  tells  us,  on  account  of  his  Laconis- 
ing  tendencies  feTrt  AaKcovicrfioj),  but  toward  the 
end  of  his  life  was  restored  to  the  full  rights 
of  citizenship.  His  sons,  moreover,  as  we  learn 
from  the  same  writer,  followed  their  father  into 
exile,  but  served  with  the  Athenian  force  at  the 
battle  of  Mantinea.  The  question,  then,  naturally 
arises  whether,  at  the  time  of  this  battle,  the 
brothers,  Diodorus  and  Gryllus,  were  Athenian 
citizens.  The  answer  to  this  question  involves  a 
knowledge  of  their  father's  position  at  that  period. 
In  regard  to  this  point  the  ancient  writers  make 
no  explicit  statements.  Krueger,  however,  after 
careful  consideration,  deems  it  probable  that  Xen- 
ophon  was  restored  to  Athenian  citizenship  in  the 
year  369.'  Grote  also  apparently  inclines  to  the 
belief  that    the  sentence  of  banishment  was    re- 

'  Krueger,  De  Xenophontis  Vita  Quaestiones  Criticae. 


voked  between  the  battles  of  Leuctra  and  of 
Mantinea.'  T^roni  the  statement  of  Dioo-enes, 
moreover,  it  is  possible  that  Diodorus  and  Gryl- 
lus  did  not  come  under  the  edict  of  banishment 
but  voluntarily  followed  their  father  into  exile. 
It  seems  probable,  therefore,  that  at  the  time  of 
Mantinea  they  were  Athenian  citizens  and  mem- 
bers of  the  deme  Erchia. 

Of  the  two  brothers,  Diodorus  accomplished 
nothing  worthy  of  note  in  the  battle.  He  re- 
turned home  in  safety  and,  as  Diogenes  Laertius 
tells  us,  there  was  born  to  him  a  son  whom  he 
named  after  his  brother  Gryllus.^  Gryllus,  on 
the  contrary,  was  killed  in  the  battle  but  left 
behind  him  an  imperishable  name.  The  Atheni- 
ans esteemed  him  the  slayer  of  Epaminondas,^ 
and  Isocrates  composed  a  panegyric  in  his 
honor.'*  The  Mantineans  accorded  him  a  public 
burial  and  on  the  spot  where  he  fell  erected  a 
monument  to  him  as  the  bravest  of  all  the  com- 
batants, whether  of  their  own  citizens  or  of  their 
allies. 5 

Another  member  of  this  family  whose  name  has 
been  preserved  is  the  Xenophon  against  whom 


'  Grote,  History  of  Greece,  Part  II. ,  Chap.  71. 

'  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil..  II.  6.  lo.  '  Pans..  S.  11.  6. 

■•  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil.,  II.  6.  lo.  ''  Paus.,  S.  9.  10  and  S.  11.  6 


Dinarchus  composed  one  of  his  orations/  Since, 
for  chronological  reasons,  this  man  can  scarcely 
be  identified  with  the  author  of  the  Anabasis,  he 
was  probably  that  writer's  grandchild  and  son  of 
the  hero  Gryllus,  This  view  is  further  strength- 
ened by  the  fact  that  Xenophon  the  son  of  Gryl- 
lus is  mentioned  by  Photius  among  the  pupils  of 
Isocrates.^ 

Leaving  this  family,  with  its  record  of  noble 
lives,  we  have  next  to  consider  the  man  in  regard 
to  whom  the  following  memorable  prophecy  is 
found  in  the  latter  part  of  Plato's  Phaedrus  :  "  He 
seems  to  me  to  have  a  genius  above  the  oratory 
ofLysias  and  altogether  to  be  tempered  of  nobler 
elements.  And  so  it  would  not  surprise  me  if,  as 
years  go  on,  he  should  make  all  his  predecessors 
seem  like  children  in  the  kind  of  oratory  to  which 
he  is  now  addressing  himself,  or  if — supposing 
this  should  not  content  him — some  diviner  im- 
pulse should  lead  him  to  greater  things.  My 
dear  Phaedrus,  a  certain  philosophy  is  inborn  in 
him."  ^ 

He  of  whom  the  Platonic  Socrates  thus  spoke 
was,  next  to  Xenophon,  Erchia's  most  famous 
son,  the  orator  Isocrates.      His  life  and  work  are 

'  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil.,  II.  6.  8.  -  Phot.,  Isoc.  orat. 

^  The  translation  is  taken  from  Jebb,  Attic  Orators,  Chap.  XII. 

lo 


likewise  too  well  known  to  require  extended  com- 
ment, even  had  the  limits  of  this  paper  allowed 
their  adequate  treatment.  \\\i  will,  then,  be  con- 
tent with  citing-  from  Professor  Jebb's  Attic  Ora- 
tors the  followinof  admirable  criticism  of  the  man. 

"  He  was  a  master  of  expression,  with  few 
ideas,  but  with  much  ingenuity  in  combining  and 
varying  these  ;  a  politician  between  whom  and 
the  power  of  seeing  facts  as  they  were,  over  any 
wide  field,  there  usually  floated  the  haze  of  some 
literary  theory  which  vanity  made  golden  ;  a 
man  of  warm,  if  somewhat  exacting,  benevolence, 
always  ready  to  do  his  best  for  those  who  believed 
in  him ;  industrious,  earnest,  with  that  simplic- 
ity which  has  been  called  an  element  of  nobleness, 
and  with  the  capacity  for  a  generous  enthusiasm 
which  w^as  never  kindled  to  a  bricrhter  flame  than 
by  the  glories  of  his  city  or  his  race.  ...  In 
his  school  he  did  a  service  peculiarly  valuable  to 
that  age  by  raising  the  tone  and  widening  the 
circle  of  the  popular  education,  by  bringing  high 
aims  and  large  sympathies  into  the  preparation 
for  active  life,  and  by  making  good  citizens  of 
many  who  perhaps  w^ould  not  have  aspired  to  be- 
come philosophers."  ' 

In   regard  to  the   orator's   family  we    have   but 

'  Jebb,  Attic  Orators,  Chap.  XII. 
II 


slight  information.  His  father,  Theodorus,  was 
a  citizen  of  the  middle  class  and  owned  slaves 
skilled  in  the  art  of  flute-making.  That  he  was, 
furthermore,  a  man  of  some  wealth  we  may  infer 
from  the  fact  that  he  served  as  choregus.'  This 
inference  is  supported  also  by  the  statement  of 
Isocrates  himself.^  The  property  which  the 
family  had  lost  in  the  war  ao^ainst  the  Lacedae- 
monians,  as  the  orator  tells  us,  had  previously 
been  employed  by  his  father  in  undertaking  litur- 
gies or  public  services  for  the  state  and  in  educat- 
ing his  children.  So  careful  was  this  education 
that  Isocrates,  as  we  learn  from  his  own  words, 
was  more  distinoruished  amonof  his  school-corn- 
rades  than  in  later  life  among  his  fellow-citizens. 

Besides  Isocrates,  Theodorus  is  known  to  have 
had  four  other  children.  These  four  children 
were  a  daughter  whose  name  has  not  been  pre- 
served and  three  sons,  Diomnestus,  Telesippus, 
and  Theodorus. 3  Of  their  life  and  position  no 
information  has  reached  us,  and  their  very  names 
are  preserved  solely  by  reason  of  their  relation- 
ship to  Isocrates. 

Leaving  these  two  prominent  families,  we 
have  next  to  consider  an  Erchian  who,  though 
less  prominent  a  figure  in  the  xA.ttic  world  than 

'  Pint.,  X  orat.  4."i.  -  Isoc,  15.  161.  '  Pint.,  x  orat.  4. 

12 


either  Xenophon  or  Isocrates,  was  held  in  high 
honor  by  his  countrymen  because  of  his  pubHc 
services.  This  man,  Thrason,  is  mentioned  by 
two  Attic  orators,  Aeschines  and  Dinarchus. 
The  former,  hi  the  speech  against  Ctesiphon,  men- 
tions him  as  tx.  proxciios  oi  \\\<i.  Thebans  and  a  lor- 
mer  ambassador  to  Thebes.'  \\\  the  latter  he  is 
spoken  of  at  somewhat  greater  length  in  the  ora- 
tion against  Demosthenes.  He  is  there  named 
among  those  who  in  times  of  great  danger  served 
as  ambassadors  "in  a  manner  worthy  of  their 
native  country  and  of  their  freedom".  "These; 
men,  O  Athenians,"  adds  the  orator,  "  are  worth)- 
advisers  and  leaders  for  you  and  for  the  people."' 
Thrason,  then,  was  not  only  a  citizen  actively  en- 
gaged in  public  affairs  at  home  but  had  also  rep- 
resented his  state  on  missions  to  foreign  powers. 
Nay,  more  than  this,  he  had  fulfilled  these  duties 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  win  the  trust  and  con- 
fidence of  his  fellow-citizens.  W'e  shall  again 
have  occasion  to  niention  this  man  under  our 
inscriptional  sources,  but  may  leave  him  for  the 
present. 3 

The  next  Erchian  to  claim  our  attention  was 
likewise  engaged  in  public  life.  Among  the  syti- 
dikoi  or    public  advocates  chosen   to  delend   the 

•  Aebchin.,  3.  138.  '  Dinarcli.,  i.  3S.  ''  See  pnge  20. 


law  of  Leptines  was  the  orator  Deinias.'  He 
was  a  man  highly  skilled  in  speaking,  and  pos- 
sessed of  much  public  spirit.  He  had  on  more 
than  one  occasion  acted  as  trierach,  and  had  also 
undertaken  numerous  other  liturgies  or  public 
services.  Even  Demosthenes,  though  arraigning 
him  for  his  support  of  the  proposed  law,  is  forced 
to  admit,  in  view  of  his  past  life,  that  he  had  ac- 
complished much  good  for  the  state. 

In  addition  to  this  man  we  are  indebted  to  De- 
mosthenes for  the  names  of  two  other  Erchians. 
The  first  of  these,  Solon,  was  registered  as  arbi- 
trator in  the  suit  of  Mantitheus  against  Boeotus 
concerning  his  mother's  dowry. ^  Nothing  further 
is  known  of  him  beyond  the  fact  that  he  died  be- 
fore rendering  his  decision  in  this  case.  The 
second,  Theogenes,  was  summoned  to  testify  as 
a  witness  in  the  speech  of  Demosthenes  against 
Neaera.  His  name  is  recorded  in  two  different 
passages  of  that  oration.  In  the  first  he  is  spoken 
of  as  "  Theogenes  of  Cothocidae  who  was  chosen 
king-archon,  a  man  of  good  birth  but  poor  and 
unskilled  in  affairs  ".^  In  the  second  passage  we 
find  merely  the  words  ''summon  for  me  Theo- 
genes  the   Erchian  ".'*     But   from   the   testimony 


'  Dem.,  20.  146,  151. 
^  Dem.,  59.  72. 


-  Dem.,  40.  16. 
■•  Dem.,  59.  84. 


14 


that  has  been  introduced  into  the  text  directly 
after  this  sentence  we  learn  that  "  Theogenes  the 
Erchian  bears  witness  that,  when  he  was  king- 
archon,  he  married  Phano,  in  the  belief  that  she 
was  the  daughter  of  Stephanus". 

The  difference  of  denie-name  in  the  two  pas- 
sages has  caused  considerable  discussion.  Schae- 
fer  considers  Theogenes  a  member  of  the  deme 
Cothocidae.'  Yoemel  and  Kirchner,  on  the  con- 
trary, would  emend  the  first  passage  by  reading 
KOIPnmAHX  for  KOenKIAHX,  and  in  this  sucr- 
gestion  they  are  supported  by  Toepffer.^  Accord- 
ing to  the  last-mentioned  writer,  moreover,  the 
Coeronidae  were  one  of  the  families  that  belonged 
to  the  Eleusinian  priestly  nobility.  This  emenda- 
tion then,  would  explain  the  entire  difficulty.  The 
two  passages  would  no  longer  be  at  variance,  but 
would,  on  the  contrary,  supplement  each  other. 
If  we  consider,  further,  the  agreement  between  the 
second  passage  and  the  added  testimony,  the  cor- 
rectness of  the  suofGfested  readinof  seems  more 
than  a  mere  possibility.  Theogenes,  accordingly, 
would  belong  to  the  family  of  the  Coeronidae  but 
to  the  deme  Erchia. 

Two  other  members  of  this  deme,  whose  names 

'  Schaefer,  Demosthenes  und  seine  Zeit,  Heilage  V,  p.   179. 
"  Toepfler,  Attisclie  Genealogie,  )i.  no,  note  2. 

15 


the  orators  have  preserved  for  us,  apparently  held 
no  official  position.  The  first,  Amyntor,  is  sum- 
moned as  a  witness  for  Aeschines  in  his  reply 
to  Demosthenes  on  the  charge  of  na^aTi^eoS Eta.^ 
From  this  speech  we  learn  that  he  sat  beside 
Demosthenes  in  the  assembly  on  the  day  when 
the  question  of  an  alliance  with  Philip  was  brought 
forward.  The  second  of  the  two  men,  Dionysius, 
is  mentioned  by  Isaeus  in  his  speech  on  the  estate 
of  Pyrrhus  as  one  of  the  persons  before  whom  a 
deposition  had  been  made  out  of  court. ^ 

To  Isaeus  also  we  owe  an  interesting  speech 
on  behalf  of  one  Euphiletus  against  the  deme 
Erchia.^  This  man  had  been  disfranchised  by 
vote  of  the  demesmen  on  the  ground  that  he 
was  an  illegitimate  son."^  The  law  provided  that 
those  unlawfully  disfranchised  had  the  right  of 
appeal  to  a  court,  having  summoned  the  demes- 
men to  appear.  If  the  decision  of  the  deme  were 
sustained,  they  were  then  to  be  sold  and  their 
goods  confiscated.^  Under  this  law  Euphiletus 
brouo-ht  suit  ao-ainst  the  deme  and  the  matter  was 
referred  to  an  arbitrator.  At  the  end  of  two 
years,  though  nothing  had  been  proved  against 

'  Aeschin.,  2.  64,  67,  68.  •  Isae.,  3.  23. 

■^  Isae.,  12.  I.  ■•  Isae.,  12.    12. 

^  Dion.  Hal.,  Delsae.  Jud.  16.     Compare  also  Aristotle,  Pol.  Athen.,42, 
p.  107  sqq. 

16 


his  legitimacy,  the  case  still  remained  undecided.' 
Being-  unable  to  obtain  redress  in  this  way  Eu- 
philetus  at  last  brought  the  matter  before  an 
ordinary  court.  The  extant  portion  of  the  speech 
is  apparently  near  the  close,  after  all  the  witnesses 
have  been  summoned.  The  speaker  himself  was 
the  brotlier  of  Euphiletus,  and  among  the  wit- 
nesses were  his  brothers  -  in  -  law.  His  father, 
Hegesippus,  therefore,  evidently  had  a  son  and 
several  daughters  of  whose  legitimacy  there  ap- 
pears to  have  been  no  question.  Their  names, 
unfortunately,  are  not  given  in  the  speech,  nor  is 
the  decision  of  the  court  in  regard  to  Euphiletus 
himself  recorded. 

Thoucrh  no  other  Erchians  are  mentioned  in 
literature,  we  learn  from  Plato  the  interesting 
fact  that  Alcibiades  possessed  considerable  prop- 
erty in  this  deme.'  From  this  statement  M.  H. 
E.  Meier  was  inclined  to  believe  that  Alcibiades 
himself  was  a  member  of  the  deme.^  This  view% 
however,  as  Toepffer  notes,  has  been  proved  in- 
correct, inasmuch  as  Alcibiades  is  now  known  from 
the  evidence  of  inscriptions  to  have  belonged  to 
the  deme  Scambonidae." 

'  Isae.,  12,  II.  -  Plat.,  Alcib.  I.,  123,  C. 

•'Ross,  Dem.  Alt.,  50,  note.  ^  Toepfter,  Attische  Genealogie,  p.  179. 

17 


I 


ERCHIANS     IN     INSCRIPTIONS. 

These  Erchians  whose  names  Hterature  has 
preserved  all  lived  and  flourished  between  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century  and  the  beginning  of 
the  third  before  Christ.  When,  however,  we 
turn  to  inscriptions,  a  much  broader  field  awaits 
us.  In  the  first  place,  the  number  of  Erchians 
w.hose  names  are  recorded  is  much  larger.  In 
the  second,  the  period  of  their  activity  extends 
from  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  before  Christ 
to  the  first  years  of  the  third  century  of  the  pres- 
ent era.  In  view  of  these  facts  the  consideration 
of  the  men  in  groups,  according  to  the  sphere  of 
their  activity,  rather  than  in  a  strictly  chronologi- 
cal order,  has  been  deemed  advisable.  That  is  to 
say,  those  who  were  in  any  way  connected  with 
the  government  will  be  considered  in  one  class, 
those  interested  in  the  navy  in  another,  and  so 
on.  In  the  various  groups  themselves,  however, 
a  chronological  arrangement  has  been  adopted. 

GOVERNMENT. 

The  first  group  to  be  considered,  not  only  as 
being  in  itself  perhaps  the  most  important  but 
also  as  presenting   the    earliest    Erchian    known 

i8 


from  inscriptional  evidence,  will  comprise  those 
who  held  official  positions  under  the  government. 
Under  this  head  the  first  member  of  the  deme  to 
be  considered  is  known  from  an  inscription  that 
belong-s  to  the  period  between  452  and  444  i!.c. 
This  document  records  the  accounts  of  commis- 
sions charged  with  the  care  of  some  public  work. 
Among  the  commissioners  for  the  eighth  year  the 
second  name  is  that  of  Strato[cl]e[s],  an  Er- 
chian.' 

For  more  than  fifty  years  thereafter  we  have 
no  record  of  any  Erchian's  being  connected  with 
the  government.  In  3S7  o,  however,  Paramy- 
thus,  son  of  Philagrus,  as  we  learn  from  a  decree 
of  the  people,  acted  as  secretary  of  the  prytany."" 
On  a  fragmentary  tablet  of  Pentelic  marble 
found  between  the  theatre  of  Dionysus  and  the 
Odeum  of  Herodes  Atticus  are  the  remnants  of  a 
treaty  made  with  Amyntas  II.  of  Macedon,  prob- 
ably in  the  year  382.  In  the  subjoined  list  of 
signers  the  first  is  an  Erchian,  — — cles.^  This 
man,  if  Koehler's  restoration,  [(f)v\a]pxoi  or  ['iTnra]- 
PXot,  in  the  preceding  line  be  correct,  at  that  time 
held  the  position  of  phylarch  or  hipparch. 

Five  years  later,  in  ;^yS  7,  when  the  Athenians 

'  C.  I.  A.,  i.  296.  2  c.  I.  A.,  ii.  add.  14  h. 

^C.  I  A.,  ii.  add.  15  b. 

19 


espoused  the  cause  of  Thebes  and  proceeded  to 
form  their  new  confederacy,  among  the  first  to 
join  the  alHance  was  Mitylene.  In  the  subse- 
quent war,  moreover,  against  the  Lacedaemo- 
nians, this  city  lent  such  faithful  and  efficient  aid 
to  Athens  that  in  the  years  369/8  and  368/7,  two 
decrees  were  passed  in  its  honor  by  the  Athe- 
nians. From  the  later  of  these  decrees,  which 
have  both  been  preserved,  we  learn  that  Aris- 
tyllus,  an  Erchian,  was  in  that  year  president 
of  the  proedroi.'^ 

Twelve  years  after  this,  in  356/5,  the  Athenians 
made  an  alliance  with  Cetriporis  the  Thracian. 
This  alliance  was  recorded  upon  a  tablet  of  Pen- 
telic  marble  of  which  three  fragments  have  been 
found.  In  the  twelfth  line  of  the  third  fraement 
Kumanudes  has  suggested  the  reading  Trpka^ei^ 
fiprjvrai.^  In  the  following  line  there  remain  only 
the  letters  XflN  .  .  XIETS.  This,  however,  has 
no  doubt  been  rightly  supplied  from  i\eschines, 
III.  138,  so  as  to  read  [©pcijacov  ['Ep]x^ev<;.  In  this 
inscription,  then,  we  have  the  official  record  of 
one  of  those  embassies  the  duties  of  which,  as 
Dinarchus  tells  us,  Thrason  performed  so  honor- 
ably. 

In  343/2  B.C.  the  senate  was  crowned  by  decree 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  add.  52  c.  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  add.  66  b. 


of  the  people  for  having  justly  and  fitly  attended 
to  the  necessary  arrangements  in  the  theatre  at 
the  Dionysiac  festival.  This,  together  with  sev- 
eral decrees  of  the  senate,  was  inscribed  upon  the 
base  of  an  offering  which  the  senators  dedicat- 
ed  to  Hephaestus.  The  mover  of  one  of  these 
senate-decrees  was  an  Erchian,  Brachyllus,  son 
of  Bathyllus.'  Since  this  was  a  decree  passed  by 
the  senate  in  honor  of  one  of  its  own  members,  it 
seems  probable  that  the  mover  was  himself  a  sen- 
ator. 

Two  years  later,  in  341/0,  the  prytanes  of  the 
Aegeid  tribe  were  crowned  by  the  senate  and  the 
people  on  account  of  their  faithful  performance 
of  duty.  In  the  list  of  prytanes,  which,  as  usual, 
was  appended  to  the  dedicatory  inscription  of  the 
offering  that  they  erected,  are  found  the  following 
six  representatives  from  Erchia  :  Tharrias,  son 
of  Tharriades  ;  Cydias,  son  of  Lysicrates  ;  Chai- 
reas,  son  of  Paramythus  ;  [Ph Jylarchus,  son 
of  Paramythus;  Xeno[c]l[e  |s,  son  of  Callia- 
[d]es;  Polyclid[e]s,  son  of  Callistratus."  Of 
these  men  the  most  important  seems  to  have  been 
Tharrias.  His  name  at  all  events  is  mentioned  in 
connection  with  three  of  the  four  decrees  of  the 
tribesmen    inscribed    upon    this    base.     The    hrst 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.   114.  C.  '  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  S72. 


and  the  third,  in  praise  respectively  of  Posidippus 
the  treasurer  of  the  tribe  and  of  the  hieropoioi  of 
the  Eleusinian  mysteries,  were  moved  by  him. 
In  the  second  he  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  three 
prytanes  who  are  to  be  praised  "  because  they 
had  justly  and  fitly  attended  to  the  gathering  of 
the  people  and  the  distribution  of  the  syvibola, 
and  had  made  the  gift '  to  the  tribesmen  ". 

From  an  inscription  found  near  the  Propylaea 
we  learn  that  in  zz'^h  ^.c.  an  Erchian  whose  name 
has  been  lost  was  president  of  the  proedroiJ' 
Some  years  later,  in  325/4,  two  members  of  this 
deme,  Epigenes  and  Theoxenus,  served  the 
state  as  public  arbitrators. ^  Then  in  319/8  and 
in  301  we  again  find  the  presidency  of  the 
procdroi  held  by  Erchians.  In  the  former  year 
the  position  was  filled  by  Demetrius,-*  and  in  the 
latter  by  Sophocles,  son  of  Pedieus.^ 

Passing  over  a  lonsf  interval  our  next  informa- 
tion  is  obtained  from  an  inscription  of  about  275 
B.C.  that  records  the  names  of  the  prytanes  of 
the  Aeo-eid  tribe.  From  this  list,  which  no  doubt 
was  originally  preceded  by  a  decree  in  honor  of 
the  outgoing  prytany,  we  learn  that  the  deme 
Erchia  had  at  that  time  ten  representatives  in  the 

'  Compare  Bull,  de  corr.  hell.,  v.  p.  362  sqq,  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  121. 

*  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  943.         •*  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  190.         ^  Delt.  Arch.,  1S89,  p.  13. 

22 


senate'  Of  these  men  Lysicrates,  son  of  Eu- 
philctus,  and  Euphiletus,  son  orL\sicrates,  whose 
names  appear  at  the  end  of  the  list,  were  presum- 
ably father  and  son.  The  only  other  prytanis 
that  we  need  to  notice  is  Solon,  son  of  Athen[o]- 
dorus.  He  is  possibly  to  be  identified  with  the 
Erchian  of  the  same  name  whose  tombstone  was 
found  in  the  Royal  Gardens  at  Athens.''  The 
names  of  the  remaining  seven  prytanes  will  be 
found  in  the  catalogue  of  Erchians  at  the  end  of 
this  paper.  Since  nothing  further  is  known  in  re- 
gard to  any  of  them,  it  seemed  unnecessary  to 
give  the  list  in  this  place. 

As  has  already  been  noted,  the  presidency  of 
the  procdroi  was  on  several  occasions  held  by 
Erchians.  About  the  time  of  the  Chremonidean 
war  this  honor  again  fell  on  two  occasions  to 
members  of  this  deme.  The  names  of  these  men 
were  respectively  Sostratus,  son  of  Callistratus,^ 
and  I  Callistr]atus,  son  of  Telesinus.^  The  latter 
name  is  supplied  by  Koehler  from  the  list  of 
prytanes  above  cited.  An  objection,  however,  to 
this  identification,  as  Koehler  himself  notes,  is 
that  it  renders  necessary  the  emendation  in  this 
list  of  TEAEXl\l^\OT  for  TEAESIOT. 

I  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  329.  »  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  2047. 

'■'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  332.  ■•  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  334.  a. 

23 


At  about  the  same  period  Deinias,  son  of 
Deino[n],  acted  as  sito?ies  for  the  /\egeid  tribe.' 
He  belonged  to  a  well-known  Erchian  family,  of 
which  this  paper  will  again  have  occasion  to 
speak.^  Passing  over  a  period  of  fifty  years  we 
learn  from  a  list  of  archons  of  the  latter  half  of  the 
third  century,  or  the  beginning  of  the  second,  that 
an  Erchian  held  the  office  of  archon  eponymous. ^ 
His  name,   with  the  exception  of  the  last  letter, 

s,  has  been  lost,  owing  to  the  mutilation  of 

the  stone  tablet.  An  interesting  inscription  of 
this  same  period,  namely  the  close  of  the  third 
century,  gives  the  report  of  a  commission  ap- 
pointed to  attend  to  the  melting  down  of  some 
objects  and  the  restoration  of  others  in  the  As- 
clepieum.  The  decree  in  accordance  wath  the 
provisions  of  which  this  commission  was  chosen 
was  moved  by  Telesinus  an  Erchian.^  A  mem- 
ber of  this  deme,  [ stjratus,  is  also  mentioned 

in  another  inscription  of  about  the  same  date  as 
the  mover  of  a  decree.^ 

Somewhat  later,  in  the  early  part  of  the  second 
century,  Erchia  again  furnished  two  presidents  of 
Xk).^  proedroi  in  the  persons  of  Ti[myll]us,  son  of 
Timy[l]lus,^  and  of  a  son  of  [Hejphaestion  whose 

1  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  335.  2  See  page  42.  ^  q    i    a.,  ii.  S59. 

*  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  839.  ^C.  I.  A.,  ii.   3S9.  «  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  408. 

24 


name  is  unknown."  About  this  same  time  also 
another  member  of  the  deme,  Aristocles,  the  son 
of  Sogenes,  was  one  of  the  superintendents 
crowned  by  the  senate.^  About  the  middle  of 
this  century,  at  a  celebration  of  the  Thesea,  the 
Aegeid  tribe,  with  Alexandrus,  son  of  Alexan- 
drus,  an  Erchian,  as  phylarch,  conc|uered  rwv 
iTTTrecov  euavSplaJ  At  these  games  Alexandrus  also 
entered  the  diatilos  for  phylarchs  and  gained  the 
victory  in  that  contest.  To  this  century  also 
probably  belongs  an  inscription  that  contains  a  list 
of  eTTifieXriTal,^  or  superintendents,  crowned  by  the 
senate.*  Among  these  men  we  find  another  Er- 
chian, Diophantus,  son  of  Diophantus. 

The  next  member  of  the  deme  of  whom  we 
have  to  speak  is  Theon.  In  loi  loo  b.c.  this 
man  was  thesmothete  and  one  of  those  magis- 
trates who  paid  the  first-fruits  to  the  Pythian 
Apollo  at  Delos.5  Six  years  later  in  95  4  his  fel- 
low demesman,  Zenon,  son  of  Meniscus,  was  one 
of  the  three  generals  at  the  Piraeus  who,  crowned 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  416.  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.   952.  ■'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  445. 

*  Eph.  Arch.,  1SS4,  p.  190.  The  Greek  editor,  Drapatses,  would  place 
this  among  tlie  ephebic  inscriptions.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  an- 
other inscription  (C.  I.  A.,  ii.  952)  that  contains  a  similar  list  of  iTriufXiyrai 
crowned  by  the  senate  is  placed  by  Koehler  among  those  that  treat  of  religi- 
ous matters.  This  furtliermore,  to  judge  from  tlie  form  of  the  letters,  be- 
longs to  about  the  same  period  as  the  one  now  under  consideration. 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  9^:5.  D. 

25 


by  the.  senate  and  the  people,  dedicated  an  offer- 
ing to  Hermes  Hegemonius.' 

In  an  inscription  of  the  Roman  period,  and 
probably  later  than  the  beginning  of  our  era,  an- 
other Erchian,  Isidorus,  the  son  of  Sosic[ra]tes 
is  mentioned.^  He  was  one  of  the  two  pyloroi 
in  the  archonship  of  Chrys[ip]pus  that  the 
decree  records  as  aixeixirroi  or  "  without  re- 
proach ".-^  In  139/40  A.D.  his  fellow  demesman, 
Zopyrus,  son  of  Apelles,  served  the  state  as  pry- 
tanis/  Sonie  years  later,  as  the  record  stands 
in  a  fragmentary  list  of  the  prytanes  of  the 
Aegeid  tribe,  two  other  Erchians,  [Aphro]disius 

and dorus,    held   the   same    position. ^      The 

last  member  of  the  deme  that  we  have  to  note  as 
holding  an  official  position  is  Helix,  son  of  Athe- 
[naejus.''  Toward  the  close  of  the  second  cen- 
tury this  man  held  the  office  of  hcgcuioii  of 
ephebes. 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.    1207.  -  Eph.  Arch.,  1885,  p.  63. 

">  The  term  pyloroi,  according  to  Liddell  and  Scott's  Greelc  Lexicon  is 
used  in  C.  I.  G. ,  306  of  the  guards  of  the  Propylaea.  Under  tliis  inscription 
Boeckh  speaks  of  tliem  as  "  custodes  arcis".  Dittenl^erger,  however  (C. 
I.  A.,  iii.  1294)  considers  that  they  should  be  distinguished  from  the 
dKpocj>v\aKes.  The  present  inscription  was  found  in  the  rear  of  the  Propy- 
laea so  that  the  pyloroi  here  also  are  probably  the  guards  of  that  building. 
Compare  also  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1284-1294. 

*  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1023.  ii.         ^  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1043.         ^  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1143. 


26 


RELIGION. 

Having-  thus  completed  our  survey  of  the  Er- 
chians  connected  with  the  government,  we  will 
next  treat  of  those  who  had  to  do  with  the  reli- 
gion of  the  state.  Under  this  head  also  we  find 
the  deme  mentioned  at  an  early  date.  An  in- 
scription has  preserved  for  us  the  accounts  of  cer- 
tain commissioners  for  the  period  between  444 
and  434  B.C.  Among  the  treasurers  of  Athena 
from  whom  these  men  obtained  various  sums  of 
money  we  find  an  Erchian,  Aristyllus,  the  son  of 
Hel[lespon]tius.'  The  next  member  of  the  deme 
who  is  known  to  have  held  a  sacred  office  is  indi- 
rectly connected  with  a  well-known  historical 
event.  When  in  433/2  i;.c.  the  Corinthian  fleet, 
after  an  engagement  with  the  Corcyraeans  off  the 
coast  of  Epirus,  were  preparing  for  a  second  at- 
tack upon  their  enemy,  now  reinforced  by  the 
Athenian  fleet,  they  were  deterred  froni  their  pur- 
pose by  the  approach  of  twent)'  additional  ships 
from  Athens  under  the  command  of  Glaucon. 
The  chief  of  the  board  of  treasurers  of  Athena 
from  whom  Glaucon  and  his  fellow-generals  ob- 
tained the  money  for  the  expenses  of  this  expedi- 
tion was es,  an  Erchian.^ 

'C.  I.  A.,  i.  299.  -C.  I.  A.,  i.  179- 

27 


The  names  of  two  members  of  the  deme  who 
Hved  during  the  last  quarter  of  the  fifth  century 
have  been  preserved.  In  418/7  [Eu]bulus  acted 
as  secretary  of  the  treasurers  of  the  other  gods,' 
and  in  410/9  Diyllus  was  chief  of  the  board  of 
hieropoioi.'^  Some  sixty  years  later,  in  351/0  B.C., 
another  Erchian,  Aristaeus,  son  of  Anticrates, 
was  a  treasurer  of  Athena.^ 

Again  passing  over  more  than  half  a  century 
we  find  our  next  member  of  the  deme  named  in  a 
decree  of  the  i22d  Olympiad.  Among  those  who 
are  to  be  praised  and  crowned  for  the  due  perform- 
ance of  certain  sacrifices  and  other  rites  in  con- 
nection with  the  worship  of  Zeus  Soter  and  Athe- 
na Soteira  is  an  Erchian,  [Drjomeas.  son  of 
D[i]ocles.-^  This  man,  who  is  mentioned  also  in 
two  other  inscriptions,  will  be  treated  of  again  in 
the  course  of  this  paper  in  connection  with  other 
members  of  the  same  family.^  The  last  Erchian 
that  we  find  mentioned  as  iillinof  a  relis;"ious  ofifice 
is  one  [TJimesitheus,  who  in  the  first  part  of  the 
second  century  before  Christ  was  hicropoios  at 
the  Ptolemaea.*^ 

Not  only,  however,  did  Erchians  hold  various 
sacred  offices  but  they  also  showed  their  religious 

'  C.  I.  A.,  i.  318.  5  c_  I,  A.,  i.  iSS.  2C.  I.  A.,  ii.  698. 

•»  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  305.  '  See  page  42.  °  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  953. 

28 


feeling  by  contributions  and  dedications  to  the 
gods.  Thus  in  a  fragmentary  list  of  the  offerings 
in  the  Hecatompedos  about  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century  we  find  some  object  of  silver,  val- 
ued at  thirty  drachmas,  mentioned  as  the  gift  of 

ades,  an   Erchian,  or  rather,  perhaps,  of  his 

wife  or  daughter.'  Again  in  the  latter  half  of  this 
century,  in  an  inscription  that  records  the  transfer 
of  property  by  the  treasurers  of  Athena,  another 
member  of  the  deme,  the  son  of  [Th]ra[syb]u- 
lus,^  is  mentioned  as  having  furnished  certain  ob- 
jects.^  These  objects,  according  to  the  conjec- 
ture of  Rangabes,  were  probably  shields.  This 
editor  also  suggests  that  "  the  son  of  Thrasyllus 
was  probably  he  who,  serving  on  the  vessel  of 
which  Pythodorus  was  trierarch,  had  obtained 
possession  of  these  shields  from  the  enemy,  and 
had  presented  them  to  his  country." 

About  the  end  of  this  same  century  an  Erchian. 

us,  the  son  of  Po[ly]euctus,  consecrated  a 

statue,  the  work  of  Cephisodotus  and  Polyeuctus, 
the  two  sons  of  Praxiteles.*  Though  the  statue 
itself  is  lost,  we  learn  from  the  inscription  that  it 
represented  a  priestess  of  Athena  Polias.  the 
daughter    of   Lysistratus    of   Bate.     This    man's 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  66i.         ■'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  736.  B.         '  C.  I.  A.,  ii.    1377. 
'  Rangabes,  Antiq.  hell.,  850  b,  reads  this  name  Thra\v[ll]us. 

29 


family,  to  judge  from  inscriptional  evidence,  was  a 
distinguished  one,  and  its  various  members  appear 
to  have  been  at  all  times  intimately  connected 
with  the  religion  of  their  country.'  The  Erchian 
who  dedicated  the  statue  was  undoubtedly  either 
the  son  or  the  husband  of  the  priestess,  A 
fellow  demesman  of  his,  [Oe]n[i]ades,  son  of 
Euarchus,  is  known,  from  an  inscription  on  a  base 
of  Hymettian  marble,  to  have  dedicated  some 
object,  probably  a  statue,  about  the  beginning  of 
our  era.-  The  last  Erchian  that  we  shall  mention 
in  this  connection  is  Hagnias.  Of  the  man  him- 
self nothing  is  known,  but  his  wife,  |Tim]othea, 
as  we  learn  from  a  base  of  Pentelic  marble  found 
near  the  Dionysiac  theatre,  consecrated  some  ob- 
ject on  behalf  of  her  children  to  Artemis  Dic- 
tynna.2 

NAVY. 

Turninor  once  more  to  secular  matters  we  have 
next  to  deal  with  those  Erchians  who  were  in  any 
way  connected  with  naval  affairs.  Execestus,"* 
the  first  to  be  noted  in  this  class,  is  recorded  in  an 
inscription  of  342/ [   B.C.  as   having  made  a  pay- 

'  Compare  C.    I.   A.,    it.    374,    602,    872,  and   Bull,  de  corr.   hell.,  iii. 
p.  489. 

-  C.  I.  A.,ii.  1374,  iii.  791.  "C.  I.  A.,  ii.   1609. 

•*  Boeckh,  Att.  Seew. ,  X.  c.  160,  reads  Theecestus. 

30 


ment  of  106  drachmas  due  to  the  government.' 
He  had  previously,  in  360/59,  served  as  super- 
intendent of  dockyards  for  the  Aegeid  tribe. 
Another  Erchian,  Antiphon,  is  mentioned  in  a 
record  of  the  transfer  of  property  made  by  the 
superintendents  of  dockyards  for  the  year  330/29 
as  having  furnished  certain  wooden  equipments 
for  quadriremes.''  Five  years  later  in  3254  we 
again  have  him  spoken  of  in  a  similar  inscription 
as  having  supplied  two  boat-hooks  for  quadri- 
remes.3  In  both  of  these  passages  he  is  men- 
tioned under  the  title  of  treasurer.  Antiphon, 
then,  in  accordance  with  the  view  of  Boeckh, 
must  have  held  the  office  of  treasurer  of  the  funds 
for  the  building  of  triremes.-* 

In  addition  to  these  men  numerous  Erchians 
served  their  country  as  trierarchs.  Cratinus,  the 
earliest  of  these  whom  we  find  mentioned,  per- 
formed this  service  in  company  with  Polyeuctus 
of  Lamptrae  in  357/6  b.c.^  His  vessel,  the  Poly- 
nice,  was  one  of  the  four  ships  that  had  sailed 
from  Munichia  during  that  year  and  were  still  at 
sea  when  the  superintendents  of  dockyards  made 
their  report.      In  the  following  year,  ■^^^'^l'^,  another 

'  C.   I.  A.,  ii.   S03.  c.  155.  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  807.  a.  27. 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  S09.  b.  no.  ■•  Boeckh,  Att.  Seew.,  p.  59  sqq. 

=■€.  I.  A.,  ii.  793.  f.  16. 


member  of  the  deme,  [Arjistolochus,  returned 
the  equipments  which  he  together  with  [Anti]- 
dorus  of  Phalerum  owed  upon  five  different 
vessels.'  This  man  is  also  known,  from  an  in- 
scription of  342/1,  to  have  served  with  Antidorus 
as  trierarch  upon  another  vessel,  the  Europa.^ 
He  is  possibly  to  be  identified  also  with  the 
[AJristolochus  mentioned  on  a  fragmentary  mar- 
ble found  at  the  Piraeus,  although,  owing  to  the 
mutilated  condition  of  the  stone,  the  deme-name 
is  lackinof-^ 

In  the  inscription  of  342/1  above  cited  four 
other  Erchians  are  found  among  the  trierarchs 
that  had  made  payments  in  account  with  their 
respective  triremes.  Euthydemus  paid  55  drach- 
mas on  the  Strategis,  Docimus  40  drachmas 
on  the  Cecropis,  Lysis  100  drachmas  on  the 
Agathonice,  and  Callias  in  conjunction  with  four 
other  men  paid  315  drachmas  5  obols  on  the 
Aoreuousa/ 

Another  member  of  this  deme,  Deinon,  son  of 
Deinias,  is  known  to  have  served  as  trierarch  in 
the  year  324/3  B.C.  from  an  inscription  that  re- 
cords the  transfer  of  property  made  by  the  super- 
intendents of  dockyards  in   the   following   year.^ 

'C.  I.  A.,ii.  794.  d.  92.  =C.  I.  A.,ii.  803.  b.  36.  'C.  I.  A.,  ii.  805. 

■*  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  803.  e.  33,  61,  114,  67.  ^C.  I.  A.,  ii.  Sii.  b.  115,  1S4. 

32 


His  vessel,  built  by  Alcaeus,  was  destroyed  with 
several  other  triremes  during-  a  severe  storm. 
Inasmuch  as  its  destruction  was  due  to  the  tem- 
pest, Deinon  claimed  that  the  loss  should  be  borne 
not  by  himself  but  by  the  state.  In  this  claim  he 
was  supported  by  the  court  to  which,  as  was 
usual  in  such  cases,  the  matter  had  been  referred. 
This  decision  freed  him  from  all  responsibility 
and  threw  the  entire  loss  upon  the  government.' 
It  did  not,  however,  release  him  from  the  obliga- 
tion of  giving  the  beak  of  a  vessel  to  the  state, 
for  his  name  is  recorded  amono-  those  from  whom 
these  articles  were  due. 

Lines  132  and  133  of  the  same  inscription, 
though  badly  mutilated,  probably  contain  another 
reference  to  this  man.  Koehler  restores  these 
lines  as  follows  : 

[      -      - JJen'w- 

[kucov  epyop] 

In  view,  however,  of  the  passages  above  cited, 
in  which  Deinon,  son  of  Deinias,  is  mentioned 
as  trierarch  upon  a  vessel,  the  work  of  Alcaeus, 
thisjeading   is   probably   incorrect.      In   its  place 

'  For  a  fuller  treatment  of  this  subject  compare  Boeckh,  Att.   Sccw. ,  p. 
214  sqq. 

33 


the  writer  would  suororest  the   followinor  restora- 

o  o  o 

tion  : 

[Aetviov  'Ep')(^i€.]  airb  [r?}?  .   .   o  .   cr  .   .   .]?,    ^X- 
[Kaiov  epyov] 

Although  in  this  restoration  line  133  is  longer 
than  in  Koehler's  it  does  not  exceed  in  length 
either  the  preceding  line  or  others  in  the  same 
column.  This  reading,  moreover,  has  two  distinct 
advantages  over  Koehler's.  In  the  first  place,  it 
has  the  merit  of  bringing  this  passage  into  full 
accord  with  the  rest  of  the  inscription  ;  and  in 
the  second  place,  it  explains  the  three  parallel 
lines  of  a  letter  preceding  the  word  a-jro,  which 
Koehler  apparently  reads  as  X  by  the  more 
natural  E.  As  to  the  abbreviation  'Epxi^e.  for  'Ep. 
%feu9,  the  frequent  use  both  of  this  form  and  of 
'Epxi'.  is  fully  established  by  the  evidence  of  other 
inscriptions.'  • 

CONTRIBUTORS. 

In  addition  to  serving  the  state  faithfully  in 
various  ofhcial  positions  the  Erchians  also  loyally 
supported  the  government  by  generous  contribu- 
tions of  money.     About  267    B.C.    at  the    begin- 

'  Compare  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  S03.  b.  36,  c.  155,  e.  61,  114  ;  ii.  859.  b.  3;   ii. 
add.  15  b;  ii.  334.  c,  d. 

34 


ning  of  the  siec^e  which  Antigonus  Gonatas,  King 
of  Macedonia,  laid  to  Athens,  the  senat(-  and  the 
people  passed  a  decree  providing  for  voluntary 
subscriptions  in  aid  of  the  state.  "Those  of  the 
citizens  or  others  dwelling  in  the  city  who  wish  to 
contribute  toward  the  safety  of  the  city  and  the 
guarding  of  the  country  are  to  announce  their  in- 
tention to  the  senate  or  to  hand  their  names  to 
the  generals  ;  but  let  no  one  be  permitted  to  con- 
tribute more  than  200  drachmas  nor  less  than  50." 
The  contributors,  moreover,  as  the  decree  further 
provides,  are  to  be  crowned,  praised,  and  honored 
by  the  people  each  in  accordance  with  his  merits. 
Their  names  also  are  to  be  inscribed  with  the 
decree  upon  a  stele,  which  is  then  to  be  erected 
in  the  market-place.  The  fragments  of  this  list 
that  have  been  preserved  disclose  the  names  of 
nine  Erchians  that  came  forward  to  the  aid  of  the 
irovernment.  These  men,  who  contributed  each 
200  drachmas,  the  highest  sum  possible,  were 
Antiphon,  Aristolas.  Aristophon,  [Diojcles, 
Dracontides,  [Drjomeas,  Lysithides.  Nicago- 
ras,  and  [X]anthippus.' 

Nearly  a  century  after  this,  about  the  year  iSo, 
several  other  members  of  the  deme  contril)uted 
for  some  object,   unfortunately  lost  by  reason   of 

'  c.  I.  A.,  ii.  334. 
'35 


the    mutilation    of   the    inscription.      These     men 

were  no[n],   [D]rome[as],      Dromocl[es], 

and  Th[eo]philus.'  Of  the  four,  Dromocl[es  1 
contributed  for  his  son  Hagnias  as  well  as  for 
himself;  and  Th[eo]philus  on  behalf  of  his  wife 
and  daughter  paid  twice  the  amount  of  his  own 
contribution. 

ARTISANS. 

Not  all  Erchians,  however,  are  to  be  found  in 
official  positions  or  among-  rich  and  generous  con- 
tributors. Some  are  known  also  to  have  faith- 
fully performed  their  duties  in  the  humbler  paths 
of  life.  One  of  these  artisans,  Ph[ilo]n,  was  a 
worker  in  stone  employed  in  the  construction  of 
the  Erechtheum.''  In  the  accounts  of  the  commis- 
sioners that  had  charc^e  of  the  buildino-  of  this 
temple  for  the  year  408/7  B.C.  two  payments, 
of  20  and  22  drachmas  respectively,  are  recorded 
as  havinor  been  made  to  this  man  for  the  fluting 
of  the  columns  of  the  east  front.  The  only  other 
Erchian  artisan  of  whom  we  know  was  a  silver- 
smith. In  an  inscription  that  records  the  transfer 
of  property  made  by  the  treasurers  of  Athena  not 
later  than  320/19  B.C.,  an  Erchian,  A  .  .  .   e  .  .  on, 

•  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  9S3.  iii.  •  C.  I.  A.,  i.  324.  b. 

36 


is  mentioned  as  the  maker  of  a  silver  hydria.' 
We  are  enal)led  to  restore  this  name  with  certain- 
ty as  A[rch]e[ph]on,  from  a  similar  inscription 
of  the  same  period  in  which  Archeph[o]n,  an  \ir- 
chian,  is  spoken  of  as  the  maker  of  certain  objects." 


NON-RESIDENTS. 

Passing  beyond  the  limits  of  Attica  we  find 
only  two  Erchians  living  in  foreign  lands.  The 
name  of  the  first  of  these  men,  in  accordance  with 
the  restoration  of  Kumanudes,  was  [Th]e[ae]te- 
[t]us.3  From  an  inscription  that  records  an  alli- 
ance made  b}-  the  Athenians  and  Thessalians  in 
361/0  B.C.,  we  learn  that  this  man  was  at  that  time 
resident  in  Thessaly.  "  He  was  commanded,"  as 
the  inscription  records,  "  to  accomplish  whatso- 
ever good  he  was  able  for  the  people  of  the 
Athenians  and  for  the  Thessalians."-*  I^eyond 
these  facts,  however,  nothing  is  known  of  his  life 
or  position. 

The  only  other  Erchian  that  is  known  to  have 
lived  abroad  is  Aeschylus,  a  cleruch  in  Lemnos. 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  720.  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  721. 

3  Ditt.,  Sylloge,  85. 

*  In  regard  to  the  translation  of  this  passage  compare  Koeliler,  Mitlh.,  li. 
209.  Compare  also  Ditt.,  Sylloge,  3?,  n.  13,  and  Hicks,  Greek  Historical 
Inscriptions,  97. 

37 


205305 


His  name  is  preserved  in  an  inscription  that  con- 
tains a  record  of  those  who  in  329/8  offered  the 
first-fruits  of  the  harvest  to  the  goddesses  at 
Eleusis.'  The  ancient  custom  of  this  offering 
had  been  re-estabhshed  under  the  administration 
of  Pericles  in  accordance  with  an  oracle  from 
Delphi,^  Among  those  who  still  observed  this 
custom  a  century  later  was  the  cleruch  colony  of 
Myrina  in  Lemnos.  In  329/8  the  offering  from 
this  city,  consisting  of  23  medimni,  2I  eKreh  of 
wheat  and  162  medimni  of  barley,  was  sent  in 
charofe  of  an  xAthenian  oeneral  and  of  two  citizens. 
Of  the  latter  one  was  the  cleruch  Aeschylus,  a 
member  of  the  deme  Erchia. 


EPHEBES. 

To  complete  our  survey  of  individual  members 
of  this  deme  we  have  still  to  consider  those  who 
appear  in  the  inscriptions  as  ephebes.  Since 
the  majority  of  these  are  not  otherwise  known 
to  us,  their  names,  with  the  approximate  date 
at  which  they  were  ephebes,  will  be  presented 
in  tabulated  form. 


'  Bull,  de  corr.  hell.,  viii.  p.  197  sqq. 
•^Ditt.,  Sylloge,  13. 
-,8 


Name. 


Name  of  Father. 


Date, 


Alexandrus  .  . 

[EubJoLilus  .  . 

Menodotus. .  . 

Olympiodorus 
[  MJenophilus. 
[Asjclepiades 

s 

Philemon  . 
Apelles, .  . 
Attlcus .  .  . 
Sostratus . 
D[e]metrius 
Mnesitheus 
Mysticus  .  . 
Mnesitheus 
Demetrius  . 
Euodus  . .  . 


[Dro  |meas  .  . 
Arch[ijdanius 

Aristonices  ,  . 

Menophilus .  . 

Satyrion  .... 
Menodotus  .  . 

Calhstratus  .  . 
Apelles 


So[s]tratus 
Demetrius . 
Helix 


Mnesitheus 
Mnesitheus 


About  270  15.C. 
About  be'-inninof  of 

first  century  B.C. 
First    half  of  first 

century  li.c. 
First    half  of   first 

century  i;.c. 
69-62  B.C. 
48-42  B.C. 
About  35  A.D. 
61   A.D. 

do. 

81-96  A.D, 

do. 
do. 
do. 

155-157  A.D. 

About  190  A.D. 

197-208  A.D, 

do. 
do. 


Several  of  these  men,  however,  require  some 
words  of  comment  before  the  subject  can  be  dis- 
missed. The  name  of  the  first  ephebe  cited  in 
the  list  above  can   probabl)-  be  restored  as  Dio- 

'  The  inscriptions  in    wliicli  the   several   names  occur  can  be  found  by 
reference  to  the  general  catalogue  of  Erchians  at  the  end  of  this  j->ai)€r. 

39 


cles.  The  reasons  that  conduce  to  this  behef 
are  so  closely  connected  with  the  question  of 
his  family  that  it  has  seemed  advisable  to 
present  them  later  in  the  discussion  of  that 
subject.  '  Twice  in  this  list  of  ephebes  we 
seem  to  find  a  father  and  a  son  mentioned. 
In  the  first  place  Mnesitheus,  son  of  Dem- 
etrius, is  probably  to  be  identified  with  the 
father  of  Demetrius  and  Euodus,  who  served 
as  ephebes  some  forty  years  later.  Again,  Me- 
nodotus,  son  of  Menophilus,  whose  name  ap- 
pears in  an  ephebic  list  at  some  time  during 
the  first  half  of  the  first  century,  was  no  doubt 
the  father  of  the  [M]enophilus  who  is  men- 
tioned as  ephebe  between  the  years  48  and  42 
before  Christ.  And  finally  the  ephebe  Olym- 
piodorus,  may  possibly  be  identified  with  the 
Olympiodorus,  son  of  Satyrion,  an  Erchian  whose 
name  is  found  in  a  sepulchral  inscription  of  the 
Roman  period.^ 

Furthermore,  as  we  learn  from  the  inscriptions 
in  which  their  names  appear,  while  serving  as 
ephebes,  Philemon  ^  was  also  an  Areopagite  and 

s  3  and  Apelles  ■*  each  held  the  position    of 

gymnasiarch.     The  duties  of  the  latter  office  are 

'  See  page  42.  '  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1677. 

3  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1085.  *  C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1091. 

40 


well  known,"  hut  tlu;  former  title  may  possibly  re- 
quire some  explanation.  According-  to  Dittenber- 
o^er ""  it  is  merely  another  manifestation  of  that  spirit 
of  imitation  which  led  the  ephebes  to  call  certain  of 
their  number  archons,  agoraiiomoi,  etc.  Imbued 
with  this  same  spirit  they  g-ave  to  certain  others  of 
their  comrades,  generally  to  those  who  belonged  to 
the  richest  and  noblest  families,  the  title  Areopagite. 

With  the  ephebes  our  survey  of  the  individual 
Erchians  is  brought  to  a  close.  The  remaining 
names  that  appear  in  inscriptions  are  at  present 
suitable  only  for  a  catalogue.  Some  of  the  men, 
however,  of  whom  we  have  already  spoken,  were 
not  only  members  of  the  same  deme  but  be- 
longed also  to  the  same  family.  The  less  impor- 
tant of  these  relationships  have  already  been 
noted  in  the  course  of  this  paper,  and  we  can  ac- 
cordingly proceed  at  once  to  the  consideration  of 
the  more  important  houses. 

Of  these  the  families  of  Xenophon  and  of  Isoc- 
rates  have  already  been  amply  treated  and  re- 
quire no  further  comment  here.  Another  distin- 
guished house,  which  we  are  able  to  trace  for 
three  generations,  is  that  of  the  orator  Deinias.' 

'  Compare  also  Dumont,  F.ssai  siir  I'ephelne  attique,  p.  219  sq^. 
'C.  I.  A.,  iii.  1233. 

^  Compare  Rangahes,  Ami<[.  hell.,  II.  47S,  and   Schaefer,  Demosthenes 
und  seine  Zeit,  I.  35S. 

41 


The  orator  himself,  who  prior  to  355  B.C.,  as  we 
learn  from  Demosthenes,  had  acted  as  trierarch 
and  had  undertaken  other  liturgies  for  the  state, 
represents  the  first  generation.  Deinon.  the  son 
of  Deinias,  whom  this  paper  has  already  noted  as 
having  been  trierarch  in  324/3,  is  probably  to  be 
identified  as  the  son  of  this  Deinias,  His  son,  in 
turn,  who  represents  the  third  generation,  was 
undoubtedly  the  Deinias,  son  of  Deinon,  that  some 
sixty  years  later  acted  as  sitones.  This  man  sup- 
ported the  honorable  record  of  his  house,  for  he 
and  his  fellow  sitonai  performed  their  duties  so 
faithfully  that  to  each  of  them  there  was  accorded 
a  golden  crown. 

Another  family  can  apparently  be  traced  in  the 
inscriptions  through  seven  generations.  The  first 
generation  is  represented  by  Diodes,  who  is 
known  to  us  only  as  the  father  of  Dromeas. 
This  Dromeas,  of  whom  we  have  already  spoken 
as  having  been  a  commissioner  in  charge  of  cer- 
tain religious  matters  between  292  and  288  e.c,  is 
no  doubt  to  be  identified  with  the  Dromeas 
known  to  us  from  an  inscription  of  about  270  as 
the  father  of  an  ephebe.  The  name  of  this 
ephebe,  though  lost,  we  are  led  to  restore  as 
Diodes,  from  another  inscription  belonging  to  the 
period  of  the  Chremonidean  war  in  which  Dro- 

42 


meas  and  Dioclcs  appear  as  contriljutors.  Now, 
if  we  assume  that  the  first  Dromeas  was  in  288 
thirty  years  old,  at  which  age  he  might  well  have 
served  as  commissioner,  he  could  readily  have 
had  a  son  sufficiently  old  to  have  been  ephebe  in 
270.  Under  this  supposition  also,  he  and  his  son 
Diodes  might  both  have  contributed  money 
toward  the  safety  of  their  country  between  the 
years  269  and  203.'  His  son  Diodes  in  turn 
might  in  258,  at  the  age  of  thirty,  have  had  a  child 
and  thirty  years  later,  in  228,  have  been  made 
happy  by  the  birth  of  a  grandchild.  As  the  lat- 
ter would  in  208  li.c.  have  reached  the  a^e  of 
manhood  he  may  reasonably  be  identified  with 
the  Diodes,  son  of  Dromeas,  whom  we  find  men- 
tioned in  a  list  of  noble  men  of  the  second  half  of 
the  third  century.''  About  ibo,  in  which  year  this 
Diodes  would  have  attained  the  age  of  forty- 
eight,  he  could  have  had  a  son  at  least  twenty 
years  old.  This  we  will  assunie  to  have  been  the 
case,  and  we  would  then  identify  this  son  with  the 
Dromeas  mentioned  in  an  inscription  of  that  pe- 
riod as  a  contributor.  If  the  preceding  assump- 
tions be  accepted  this  Dromeas  might  easily  have 

'  Tliis  date  for  the  Chremonidean  war  is  taken  from  Tliirlwall,  History 
of  Greece,  pp.  377-378. 
•^C.  I.  A.,  ii.  1047. 

43 


had  a  son  old  enough  to  enter  the  diaulos  for 
horsemen  at  a  celebration  of  the  Thesea  about 
the  year  150.  In  an  inscription  of  about  that 
time  Dromeas,  son  of  Dromeas,  of  the  Aegeid 
tribe,  is  mentioned  as  winner  in  that  contest.' 
Thouofh  this  man's  deme-name  is  not  oriven,  it  is 
a  reasonable  conjecture  that  he  was  an  Erchian 
belonging  to  this  same  family  and  son  of  the 
contributor  Dromeas. 

In  addition  to  these  seven  generations  still  an- 
other man  is  possibly  to  be  connected  with  this 
family.  In  an  inscription  found  near  the  ruins  of 
the  city  walls  Diodes,  son  of  Dio ,  is  men- 
tioned among  those  who  dedicated  a  tower.^  If, 
as  Koehler  suggests,  this  man  was  an  Erchian, 
his  father's  name  is  probably  to  be  restored  as 
Dio[cles].  In  that  case,  since  the  inscription 
belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Chremonidean  war, 
the  dedicator  would  have  been  the  son  of  the 
first  Diodes  and  brother  of  the  commissioner 
Dromeas. 3 

Had  the  deme  possessed  many  families  such  as 
these,  had  it  numbered  among  its  sons  many 
citizens  such  as  Thrason,  Isocrates,  and  Xeno- 
phon,  its  position   in  the  Attic  world  must  have 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  445.  -  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  9S2. 

"  Compare  Appendix,  Note  2. 

44 


been  one  of  no  small  importance.  That  its 
actual  place  amon^,''  the  denies  of  its  tribe  was  a 
high  one  can  readily  be  seen  by  an  examination 
of  the  lists  of  prytanes  of  the  Aegeid  tribe.  Of 
three  such  lists  that  are  now  known  to  us  but 
one  is  complete.  In  this,  which  belongs  to  the 
year  341  o  b.c,  twenty  demes  are  represented.' 
Of  these  Erchia  has  the  largest  representation, 
with  six  men,  although  Icaria  and  Halae  press 
close  behind,  each  with  five  prytanes.  In  one  of 
the  incomplete  lists  Erchia  is  unfortunately  among 
the  missing  demes.  The  other  inscription,  in 
which  Erchia  is  one  of  the  sixteen  demes  named, 
belongs  to  the  period  of  the  twelve  tribes.^  Of 
the  four  missing  demes,  Gargettus,  Icaria,  Bate, 
and  Diomea,  one  or  more  no  doubt  had  been 
transferred  to  the  one  or  the  other  of  the  new 
tribes.  There  is  consequently  an  increased  rep- 
resentation from  some  of  the  remaining  demes. 
Erchia  still  stands  first  but  has  now  furnished 
ten  prytanes  in  place  of  six.  Halae  still  comes 
next,  but  with  eight  representatives  instead  of 
five,  and  other  demes  also  show  a  slight  increase.^ 
The  prominence  of  Erchia   is   further   empha- 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii.  S72.     Ancyle  ajtpears  twice  in  this  list.     Comiiare  Ilauvclte- 
Eesnault,  Bull,  de  corr.  hell.,  v.  p.  366. 
'C.  I    A.,  ii.  329. 
'_Conipare  Bull.cle  coir,  hell.,  v.  p.  365  sqq. 

45 


sized  by  the  numerous  official  positions  that  were 
held  by  its  members.  The  number  and  the  im- 
portance of  these  can  easily  be  seen  from  the  fol- 
lowing summary :  i  archon  eponymous,  i  king 
archon,  i  thesmothete,  i  general,  2  phylarchs,  8 
presidents  of  \h.&  procd7'oi,  18  prytanes,  3  movers 
of  decrees,  i  secretary  of  the  prytany,  2  orators, 
I  ambassador,  i  sitones,  2  superintendents,  2 
commissioners,  3  arbitrators,  i  hegemon  of  ephe- 
bes,  I  pyloros,  i  superintendent  of  dockyards, 
I  treasurer  of  the  funds  for  the  building  of  tri- 
remes, 8  trierarchs,  3  treasurers  of  Athena,  i  secre- 
tary of  the  treasurers  of  the  other  gods,  2  hiero- 
poioi.  The  deme  also  reckoned  among  its  mem- 
bers I  silversmith,  i  worker  in  stone,  18  ephebes, 
T  cleruch,  3  di /casts,  2  dedicators,  18  contribu- 
tors, and  I  philosopher  and  historian. 

The  important  position  of  the  deme,  however, 
was  not  sufficient  to  protect  it  from  the  attacks  of 
comedy.  In  an  inscription  of  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century  before  Christ  a  comedy  named 
The  Erchians  is  mentioned.'  With  what  subject 
this  play  dealt  is  a  question  to  which  we  can  give 
no  definite  answer.  Isocrates,  it  is  true,  is 
known  to  have  been  assailed  by  comedians  who 
did  not  forget  to  avail  themselves  of  the  fact  that 

'  C.  I.  A.,  ii  '975.  f. 

46 


his  fatlicr  owned  slaves  skilled  in  ilute-makinor.' 
A  fragment,  indeed,  of  the  Atalanta  of  Strattis 
has  preserved  for  us  precisely  such  an  attack 
upon  the  orator.^  So  personal  a  matter,  how- 
ever, could  scarcely  have  been  the  subject  of 
The  Erchians,  This  comedy,  to  judg-e  from  the 
title,  must  have  dealt  not  with  an  individual  but 
with  the  demesmen  generally.  But  the  particular 
foible  that  it  assailed,  the  special  vanit)-  or 
weakness  against  which  it  was  directed,  are  un- 
fortunately no  longer  known. 

Such,  then,  are  the  foundations  upon  which  our 
knowledge  of  Erchia  rests.  Fragmentary  as  are 
these  references,  accidental  as  has  been  their  pres- 
ervation, they  yet  enable  us  to  form  some  opin- 
ion of  the  Erchians  and  of  their  deeds.  Collect- 
ively the  period  of  their  greatest  activity  and  in- 
fluence was  apparently  the  latter  half  of  the  fifth 
and  the  two  succeeding  centuries.  Individually 
we  find  them  active  at  all  times  in  every  sphere  of 
life.  The  artisan  faithfully  performing  his  daily 
task,  the  government  official  honorably  discharg- 
ing the  duties  of  his  position,  the  wealthy  citizen 
contributing  generous  sums  for  his  country's 
safety,  the   devout   worshipper  serving  his   gods 

'  Plut.,  X  orat.,  4.   I. 

■' Meineke,  Frag.  Com.  Grace,  Strattis,  .\talanta,  i. 

47 


and  honoring  them  with  dedicatory  offerings, 
such  are  the  pictures  of  Erchian  life  that  greet 
us  on  every  side. 

In  the  days  of  this  nineteenth  century  in  this 
American  repubHc  a  great  pohtical  party  has  ral- 
hed  to  the  cry  of  "  A  pubhc  office  is  a  pubHc 
trust  ".  But  long  ages  since,  in  the  days  before  the 
Christian  era,  in  that  Attic  democracy  beyond  the 
seas  the  members  of  a  httle  deme  were  already 
expressing  this  very  principle  in  their  daily  lives. 
Erchians  represented  their  state  in  foreign  mis- 
sions, and  were  proudly  pointed  to  by  orators  as 
examples  worthy  of  imitation,  Erchians  served 
as  trierarchs,  prytanes,  commissioners,  presidents 
of  the  proedroi^  and  in  many  other  positions  of 
honor  and  of  power ;  in  all  their  duties  were 
faithfully  performed.  Erchians,  in  fine,  held  the 
high  offices  of  state  in  which  the  public  moneys 
were  their  trust,  and  were  praised  by  the  people 
for  the  integrity  with  which  they  had  discharged 
their  task. 

Had  no  member  of  the  deme  save  Xenophon 
and  Isocrates  been  known  to  us,  the  accident  that 
made  it  the  birthplace  of  two  such  men  might 
have  caused  Erchia  to  be  considered  fortunate, 
but  nothing  more.  That  fact  could  certainly  not 
have  impressed  upon  the  demesmen  as  a  whole 


the  stamp  of  integrity  and  of  honor.  Hut  Xcno- 
phon  and  Isocrates  were  merely  the  two  greater 
stars.  About  them  shone  others  of  lesser  size, 
but  bright  each  and  every  one  after  its  own  mag- 
nitude. Together  they  formed  in  the  Attic  firma- 
ment a  bright  constellation,  called  Erchia,  a  deme 
of  Attica. 


49 


CATALOGUE    OF    ERCHIANS. 

All  references  are  to  the  Corpus  Inscriptionum 
Atticarum,  unless  it  be  otherwise  stated.  The  fol- 
lowing abbreviations  are  used:  b.,  brother;  d., 
daughter;  f..  father;  s.,  son.  For  greater  con- 
venience of  reference  the  Greek  names  have  sim- 
ply been  transliterated. 

Aischlnes,  f.  of  Glyke,  ii.  2648. 

Aischron,  f.  of  Euagora,  iii.  1674. 

Aischylos,   cleruch    in    Lemnos,    Bull.   corr.  hell., 

viii.  197. 
xAlexandros,  s.  of  Alexandros,  phylarch,  ii.  445. 
Alexandros,  f.  of  Alexandros,  ii.  445. 
Alexandros,  s.  of  Arch[i]damos,  ephebe,  ii.  467. 
Alkios,  f.  of  Timotheos,  Mitth.,  xii.  90. 
Amphikles,  s.  of  Pythodoros,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
Amyntor,  Aeschin.,  2.  67. 
Antikrates,  f.  of  Aristaios,  ii,  698. 
Antiphon,  contributor,  ii.  334.  c. 
Antiphon,  treasurer,  ii.  807.  a,  809.  b. 

50 


Anthip[posJ,  f.  of  Hegesias,  ii.  2037. 

Apelles,  f.  of  Attikos,  iii.  1091. 

Apelles,  ephebe,  iii.  109  t. 

Apelles,  f.  of  Zopyros,  iii.  1023. ii. 

Aphrodeisios,  f.  of  Epiktetos,  Deltion  Arch.,  1890, 

p.  141. 
|'Aphro]disios,  prytanis,  iii.  1043. 
Archemachos,  f.  of  Kallimachos,  iii.  3573. 
Archephon,  silversmith,  ii.  720,  721. 
Arch[i]damos,  f.  of  Alexandros,  ii.  467. 
Aristaios,  s.  of  Antikrates,  treasurer  of  Athena,  ii. 

698. 
Aristokles,  s.  of  Sogenes,  superintendent,  ii.  952. 
Aristokratei[a],  d.  of  Hierokles,  Mitth.,  xii.  90. 
Aristolas,  contributor,  ii.  334.  d. 
Aristolochos,  trierarch,  ii.  794.  d,  803.  b,  805. 
Aristonikos,  f.  of  [Eubjoulos,  ii.  469. 
A[r]istophilos,  f.  of  Sokles,  ii.  329. 
Aristophon,  contributor,  ii.  334.  c. 
Aristyllos,     s.    of    Hel[lespon]tios,    treasurer    of 

Athena,  i.  299. 
Aristyllos,  president  of  the  proedroi,  ii.  add.  52  c. 
Asklepiades,  f.  of  Asklepiodor|  os],  ii.  2032. 
[As]klepiades,  ephebe,  iii.  1076. 
Asklepiodor[os],  s.  of  Asklepiades,  ii.  2032. 
Astouchos,  iii.  2164. 
Athe[naiJos,  f.  of  Helix,  iii.  1 143. 

51 


Athen[o]doros,  f.  of  Solon,  ii.  329,  2047. 
Attikos,  s.  of  Apelles,  ephebe,  iii.  109 1. 
Autodikos,  ii.  2033. 

Autodikos,  f   of  Pheidestratos,  ii,  2040. 
Bathyllos,  f,  of  Brachyllos,  ii.  114,  C. 
Brachyllos,  s.  of  Bathyllos,  mover  of  a  decree,  ii. 

1 14.  C. 
Chaireas,  s.  of  Paramythos,  prytanis,  ii.  872. 
Deinias,  orator,  Dem.  20.  146,  151  ;  f  of  Deinon, 

ii.  811. 
Deinias,  s,  of  Deino[n],  sitones,  ii,  335. 
Deinon,   s,    of   Deinias,    trierarch,   ii,    811  ;   f.    of 

Deinias,  ii.  335, 
Demetrios,  president  of  the  proedroi,  ii.  190, 
D^ejmetrios,  s.  of  So[s]tratos,    ephebe,  iii.    1091. 

ii. 
Demetrios,  f  of  Mnesitheos,  iii.  1121. 
Demetrios,  s.  of  Mnesitheos,  ephebe,  iii.  1171. 
Dexikrates,  f.  of  Dexis,  ii,  2034. 
Dexis,  s.  of  Dexikrates,  ii.  2034. 
Diodoros,  s.  of  Xenophon,  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit,  Phil., 

2.  6.  8, 
D[i]okles,  f.  of  [Drjomeas,  ii.  305  ;  f.  of  Diokles,' 

ii.   982. 
Diokles,  s.   of  Dio[kles],  dedicator,'  ii.  982. 
[Diojkles,  contributor,  ii.  334.  c. 

'  See  the  remarks  on  page  44. 
52 


Diokles,  s.  of  Droineas,  ii.  1047. 

Diomnestos,    s.    of  Thcodoros,    b.  of   Isokrates, 

Plut.,  X  orat.  4. 
Dion,  f.  of  Epa[in]ete,  iii.  1673. 
Dionysios,  Isaeus,  3.  23. 
Diophantos,  f.  of  Diophantos,  Eph.  Arch.,  1884.  p. 

190. 
Diophantos,    s.     of    Diophantos,   superintendent, 

Eph.  Arch.,  1884,  p.  190. 
Diyllos,  hieropoios,  i.   188. 
Dokimos,  trierarch,  ii.  803.  e. 
Drakontides,  contributor,  ii.  334.  c. 
[Drjomeas,   s.   of  D[i]okles,  commissioner  (?),  ii. 

305  ;   f.   of '    ii.    330.    d  ;   contributor,   ii. 

334-  c. 
Dromeas,  f.  of  Diokles,  ii.  1047. 
Dromeas,   f.  of  Dromeas,   ii.   445  ;   contributor,  ii. 

983- 
Dromeas,    s.    of  Dromeas,  winner   of  diaulos  for 

horsemen,  ii.  445. 
Dromokl[es],  f.    of   Hagnias,  contributor,  ii.    9S3. 

ii. 
Eisidoros,  s.  of  Sosik'"ra]tes,  pyloros,  Eph.  Arch.. 

1885,  p.  63. 
Egertios,  s.  of  KalHas,  ii.  2o^;5. 
Epa[in]ete,  d.  of  Dion,  iii.  1673. 

'  See  the  remarks  on  pages  39  and  42. 
S3 


Epam[e]ino[n]  or  Epamin[oJndas,  f.  of  Epigenes, 

ii.  329. 
Epigenes,  arbitrator,  ii.  943. 
Epigenes,  s.  of  Epam[e]ino[n]  or  Epamin[o]ndas, 

ii.  329. 
Epiktetos,  s.  of  Aphrodeisios,  Deltion  Arch.,  1890, 

p.  141. 
Euagora,  d.  of  Aischron,  iii.  1674. 
Eualkides,  f.  of  Phrasistlienes,  Mitth.,  xii.  90. 
[EJualkos,  f.  of  Eualkos,  ii.  2036. 
Eualkos,  s.  of  [Ejualkos,  ii.  2036. 
Euarchos,  f.  of  [Oijn[i]ades,  ii.  1374,  iii.  791. 
Eubios,  s.  of  Eupolemos,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
[Eujboulos,  secretary  of  treasurers  of  the  other 

gods,  i.  318. 
[Eub"|oulos,  s.  of  Aristonikos,  ephebe,  ii.  469. 
Euodos,  s.  of  Mnesitheos,  ephebe,  iii.  1171. 
Euphiletos,  s.  of  Hegesippos,  Isaeus,  12. 
Euphiletos,  f.  of  Lysikrates,  ii.  329. 
Euphiletos,  s.  of  Lysikrates,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
Eupolemos,  f,  of  Eubios,  ii.  329. 
Eupolemos,  s.  of  Timodo[k]os,  dikast,  Eph.  Arch., 

1887,   p.  55;  f.  of  Timodo[k]os,  Eph,   Arch., 

1887,  p.  54. 
Euxenos,  s.  of  Eux[i]theos,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
Eux[i]theos,  f,  of  Euxenos,  ii.  329. 
Euxitheos,  s.  of  Timotheos,  Mitth.,  xii.  90. 

54 


Euthydemos,  trierarch,  ii.  803.  e. 

Exekestos,  superintendent  of  dockyards,  ii.  803.  c. 

Glyke,  d.  of  Aischines,  ii.  2648. 

Gryllos,  f.  of  Xenophon,  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.   Pliil., 

2.  6.  I. 
Gryllos,  s.  of  Xenophon,  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil., 

2.  6.  8. 
Gryllos,  s.  of  Diodoros,  Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil.,  2. 

6.  10. 
Magnias,  s.  of  Dromokl[es],  ii.  983.  ii. 
Hagnias,  ii.  6109. 

Hagnodemos,  f.  of  Kleiokratea,  ii.  2043. 
Hegesias,  s.  of  Hegesippos,  C.  I.  G.,  627. 
Hegesias,  s.  of  Anthip[pos],  ii.  2037. 
Hegesippos,  f.  of  Euphiletos,  Isaeus,  12.  12. 
Hegesippos,  f.  of  Hegesias,  C.  L  G.,  627. 
Hel[lespon]tios,  f.  of  Aristyllos,  i.  299. 
Helix,  s.  of  Athe[nai]os,  hegemon  of  ephebes,  iii. 

II43- 
Helix,  f.  of  Mystikos,  iii.  1162. 

[Hejphaistion,  f.  of ,  ii.  416. 

Hephaistion,  s.  of  Philemon,  iii.  1675. 

Hephaistion   or    Hephestos,    f.    of  Philemon,    iii. 

Hierokles,  f.  of  Aristokratei[a],  Mittli.,  xii.  90. 
Isokrates,  s.  of  Theodoros.  orator,  Steph.  Byz. 
Kalliafdjes,  f.  of  Xeno[k]l[ee]s,  ii.  872. 

55 


Kallias,  trierarch,  ii.  803.  e. 
Kallias,  f.  of  Egertios,  ii.  2035. 
Kallimachos,  s.  of  Archemachos,  iii.  3573. 
Kallinike,  d.  of  Theodoros,  ii.  2041. 
Kallils:rates,  f.  of  Kallistratos,  ii.  2042. 
Kallistratos,  s.  of  Kallikrates,  ii.  2042. 
Kallistratos,  f.  of  Philemon,  iii.  1085. 
Kallistratos,  f.  of  Polykleid[e]s,  ii.  872. 
Kallistratos,  f.  of  Sostratos,  ii.  332. 
Kallistratos,  s.  of  Telesias   or    Telesi[n]os,   pry- 

tanis,'  ii.  329. 
[Kallistrjatos,   s.  of  Telesinos,  president    of  the 

proedroi,'  ii.  334.  a. 
Kleiokratea,  d.  of  Hagnodemos,  ii.  2043. 
Kratinos,  trierarch,  ii.  793.  f. 
Kydias,  s.  of  Lysikrates,  prytanis,  ii.  872. 
Leon,  f.  of  Theudote,  ii.  2039. 
[Lyjsikrates,^  ii.  2044. 
Lysikrates,  f.  of  Kydias,  ii.  872. 
Lysikrates,   s.   of  Euphiletos,   prytanis,  ii.   329;   f. 

of  Euphiletos,  ii.  329. 
Lysis,  trierarch,  ii.  803.  e. 
Lysitheides,  contributor,  ii.  334.  d. 
Makron,  f,  of  Nikostrate,  iii.  1676. 
Menippos,  s.  of  Zoilos,  ii.  2045. 

'  See  the  remarks  on  page  23. 

'  Rangabes,  Antiq.  hell.,  1455  reads  [Pa]sikrates. 

56 


Meniskos,  f.  of  Zenon,  ii.  1207. 

Menodotos,   s.  of  Menophilos,  ephebe,  ii.  469  ;   f. 

of  [MJenophilos,  ii.  481. 
Menophilos,  f.  of  Menodotos,  ii,  469. 
[M  |enophilos,  s.  of  Menodotos,  epiiebe,  ii.  481. 
Mikalion,  s.  of  Mikion,  ii.  2046. 
Mikion,  f.  of  Mikalion,  ii.  2046. 
Mnesitheos,  ephebe,  iii.  1171. 
Mnesitheos,  s.  of  Demetrios,  ephebe,  iii,    1121  ;  f, 

of  Demetrios  and  of  Euodos,  iii,  1 1  7 1 . 
Mystikos,  s.  of  Helix,  ephebe,  iii.  1162, 
Nikagoras,  contributor,  ii.  334,  d. 
Nikostrate,  d.  of  Makron,  iii.  1676. 
[Oi]n[i]ades,  s.  of  Euarchos,  ii,  1374,  iii,  791. 
Olympiodoros,  s.    of  Satyrion,  ephebe,    iii,    1677, 

Bull,  corn  hell.,  xiii.  p.  269, 
Pammenes,  s.  of  Pamnienes,'  Dem.,  21.  22. 
Pammenes,  f.  of  Pammenes,'  Dem,,  21.  22. 
Panaitios,  s.  of  Philon,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
Paramythos,  s.  of  Philagros,  secretary  of  the  pry- 

tany,  ii.  add.  14  b. 
Paramythos,  f,   of  Chaireas  and  of  [Ph  jylarchos, 

ii,  872. 
Pedieus,  f.   of  Sopliokles,   Deltion  Arch.,   1S89,  p. 

13- 

'  The  added  testimony  in  whicli  this  name   appears  is  undoubtedly  spu- 
rious. 

57 


Pheidon,  s.  of  The[o]doros,  ii.  2048. 
Pheidestratos,  s.  of  Autodikos,  ii.  2040. 
PhilagTos,  f.  of  Paramythos,  ii.  add.  14  b. 
Philemon,  f.  of  Hephaistion,  iii.  1675. 
Philemon,    s.   of  Hephaistion    or    Hephestos,    iii. 

1675- 
Philemon,  s.  of  Kallistratos,  ephebe,  iii.  1085. 

Philition,  d.  of  Thespias,  Deltion  Arch.,  1890,  p.  82. 

Ph[ilo]n,  worker  in  stone,  i.  324.  b. 

Philon,  f.  of  Panaitios,  ii.  329. 

Phrasisthenes,  s.  of  Eualkides,  Mitth.,  xii.  90. 

[Phjylarchos,  s.   of  Paramythos,  prytanis,  ii.  8 72. 

Po[ly]euktos,  f.  of os.  ii.  1377. 

Polykleid[e]s,  s.  of  Kallistratos,  prytanis.  ii.   872. 

Pythodoros,  f.  of  Amphikles,  ii.  329. 

Satyrion,  f.  of  Olympiodoros,  iii.  1677,  Bull,  corn 

hell.,  xiii.  269. 
Sogenes,  f.  of  Aristokles,  ii.  952. 
Sokles,  s.  of  A[r]istophilos,  prytanis,  ii.  329. 
Solon,  s.  of  Athen[o]doros,  prytanis,  ii.  329,  2047. 
Solon,  arbitrator,  Dem.,  40.  16. 
Sophokles,  s.   of  Pedieus,  president  of  the  proe- 

droi,  Deltion  Arch.,  1889,  p.  13. 
Sosik[ra]tes,  f  of  Eisidoros,  Eph.  Arch.,  1885,  p. 

63. 
Sostratos,  s.  of  Kallistratos,  president  of  the  proe- 

droi,  ii.  332. 

5S 


Sostratos,  ephebe,  iii.  109 1.  ii. 
So[s]tratos,  f.  of  D[e]metrios,  iii,  1091.  ii. 

Strato[kl]e[s],  s.  of ,  commissioner,  i.  296. 

Telesias  or  Telcsi[n]os,  f.  of  Kallistratos,'  ii,  329. 
Telesinos,  f.  of  j  Kallistr  |atos/  ii.  334,  a. 
Telesinos,  mover  of  a  decree,  ii.  839. 
Telesippos,  s.  of  Theodoros,  b.  of  Isokrates,  Pkit., 

X  orat.  4. 
Tharriades,  f.  of  Tharrias,  ii.  872. 
Tharrias,  s.  of  Tharriades,  prytanis,  ii.  872. 
|Th]e[ai]te[t]os,  Ditt.,  Sylloge,  S^. 
Theodoros,  f.  of  Isokrates,  Dion.  Hal.,  Isok.  i. 
Theodoros,  s.  of  Theodoros,  b.  of  Isokrates,  Plut., 

X  orat.  4. 
Theodoros,  f.  of  Theodor[os],  ii.  2038. 
Theodor[osJ,  s.  of  Theodoros,  ii.  2038. 
Theodoros,  f.  of  KalHnike,  ii.  2041. 
The[o]doros,  f.  of  Pheidon,  ii.  2048. 
Theogenes,  king-  archon,  Dem.,  59.  84. 
Theon,  thesmothete,  ii.  985.  D. 
Th[eo]philos,  contributor,  ii.  983.  iii. 
Theoxenos,  arbitrator,  ii.  943. 
Thespias,  f.  of  PhiHtion,  Dekion  Arch.,  1890,  p.  82. 
Theudote,  d.  of  Leon,  ii.  2039. 
Thrason,  ambassador,  ii.  add.   66  b,  Aeschin.,  3. 

138,  Dinarch.,  i.  38. 

'  See  the  remarks  on  page  23. 
59 


[rh]ra[syb]oulos,  f.  of s,  ii.  736.  B. 

[TJimesitheos,  hieropoios,  ii.  953. 

Timodo[k]os,  s.  of  Eupo[lemos],  dikast,  Eph. 
Arch.,  1887,  p.  54;  f.  of  Eupolemos,  Eph. 
Arch.,  1887,  p.  55. 

Timotheos,  s.  of  Alkios,  f.  of  Euxitheos,  Mitth., 
xii.  90. 

Ti[myll]os,  s.  of  Timy[l]los  president,  of  the  proe- 
droi,  ii.  40S. 

Timy[l]los,  f.  of  Ti[myll]os,  ii.  408. 

[XJanthippos,  contributor,  ii.  334.  d. 

Xeno[k]l[ee]s,  s.  of  Kania[d]es,  prytanis,  ii. 
872. 

Xenophon,  s.  of  Gryllos,  general,  historian,  phi- 
losopher, Diog.  Laert.,  Vit.  Phil.,  2.  6.  i. 

Xenophon,  s,  of  Gryllos,  Phot.,  Isok.  orat. 

Zenon,  s.  of  Meniskos,  general,  ii.  1207. 

Zoilos,  f.  of  Menippos,  ii.  2045. 

Zopyros,  s.  of  Apelles,  prytanis,  iii.  1023.  ii. 

Epik ,  dikast,  ii.  908. 

ades,  ii.  661. 

doros,  prytanis,  iii.     043. 

es,  treasurer  of  Athena,  i.  179. 

is,  f.  of •,  ii.  770. 

kles,  hipparch  or  phylarch,  ii.  add.  15  b. 

non,  ii.  983. 

o]gen[es],  dikast,  ii.  926. 

60 


-OS,  s.  of  Po[ly]euktos,  consecrates  a  statue,  ii. 

^377- 
-s,  s.  of  [Th]ra[syb]oulos,  ii.  j^)^.  B. 

-s,  archon  eponymous,  ii.  859. 

-s,  ephebe,  iii.  1085. 

-  st|ratos,  mover  of  a  decree,  ii.  389. 

-  tjrephes,  f.  of ,  ii.  yj^. 

-,  president  of  the  proedroi,  ii.  121. 
-,  s.  of  [Drojmeas,  ephebe,'  ii.  330.  d. 
-,  s.  of  [Hejphaistion,  president  of  the  proe- 
droi, ii.  416. 
-,  f.  of  Stratokles,  i.  296. 

-,  s.  of is,  ii.  770, 

-,  s.  of t]rephes,  ii.  778. 


-,  ii.  1031. 
-,  ii.  .1622. 


I  See  remarks  on  page  39. 


61 


APPENDIX. 


Note  I. — The  following  variations  are  found^  in  the 
form  of  the  deme-name :  'Ep)(^la,  Phot.,  Suid.;  "Ep')(eLa, 
Hesych.,  Diod.  apud  Harp.;'£p;^ta,  Steph.  Byz.;'0p;^teu9, 
Ross,  Dem.  Att.,  jj  ;  'Ep')(^Leh,  Polem.ap.  Suid.  s. ' A^r}viev<^, 
In  regard  to  these  forms  compare  the  following  passages  : 
Sauppe  Or.  frag.  333,  "  'Ep-x^tddev,  Sauppius  :  'Ep-^LoZai, 
Photius  et  'S\.\\ddiS,'Ep')(eLa6ev  b.  et  in  inscriptionibus  non 
invenitur  neque  analogia  commendatur.  Veri  accentus 
vestigia  et  apud  Photium  exstant  et  apud  Plat.  Ale.  I. 
123  D.  Spiritum  asperum  fuisse  et  Polemo  tradidit  et 
tituli  testantur  antiquiores,  sed  Harpocratio  lenem  ad- 
miserit."  Meineke,  frag.  com.  graec,  III.  163,  "  Aspero 
spiritu  nomen  hoc  ab  antiquis  Atticis  scriptum  esse  et 
tituli  docent  et  diserto  testimonio  constat  Polemonis 
apud  Suidam."  Ross,  Dem.  Att.,  jy,  "  Bemerkenswerth 
ist  hier  die  Form  'Op-^^^iev^  statt  'Ep)^tev<i,  wie 'Ep')(^o/jLev6<i 
und  'Op)(pfiev6<;  neben  einander  bestehen,  und  das  Volk 
noch  heute  6x0p6<i,  o^co  und  Aehnliches  statt  i')(dp6<i,  e'^co 
u.  s.  w.  spricht."  iNIeisterhans,  Gram,  der  Att.  Insch.,  p. 
17.  4,  " '£/o;^tei;9  ist  die  Orthographic  der  Klassischen, 
'Op-)(^iev<i  die  Orthographic  der   romischen  Zeit."     As  a 

62 


matter  of  fact  the  form  'Opxi^^f  occurs  only  in  one  in- 
scription, C.  I.  A.,  ii.  2039.  As  to  the  form  'Epxiev^;. 
the  spiritus  asper  is  written  once  in  an  inscription  of 
410/9  (C.  I.  A.,  i,  188)  and  twice  in  one  of  408/7  (C.  I.  A., 
i.  324.  b).  It  is,  however,  omitted  in  inscriptions  of 
444/3  (C.  I.  A.,  i.  296),  of  444-434  (C.  I.  A.,  i.  299),  of 
433/2  (C.  I.  A.,  i.  179),  and  of  418/7  (C.  I.  A.,  i.  318). 


63 


Note  2. 


On 


c:) 


^    < 


u 


ON 


U 

o 


o 

CO 


< 


o 
o 

M 

I 
o 


O 


< 


u 


O     oo 

CO      o^ 


o 

1-n 


i     < 


^ 


O 


^ 


U 


c;        c; 


L> 


t  —  §  o 


5^ 

a 

u 

, 

ra 

pq 

CO 

On 

ro 

VO 

._; 

n 

1 

"^ 

1 

< 

u 


^ 


64 


AUTHORITIES. 


INSCRIPTIONAL   SOURCES. 


The  word  index  in  brackets  after  the  name  of  a  book 
indicates  that  the  indices  were  reHed  upon  to  furnish  all 
references  to  Erchians  in  that  work. 
Corpus  Inscriptionum  Graecarum  (index). 
Corpus  Inscriptionum  Atticarum,  I.  III.  (index) ;  II.  IV". 
Dittenberger,  Sylloge  Inscriptionum  Graecarum  (index). 
Bulletin    de    correspondance    hellenique,    i-io    (index), 

11-14. 
Mittheilungen  des  deutschen  archaeologischen  Institutes 

in  Athen,  i-io  (index),  11-15. 
Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies,    i-io;  11,  Pts.  1-2. 
American  Journal  of  Archaeology,   1-5  ;  6,  Pts.  1-3. 
' E^rjfiepL'i  dpxci'i'OXo'yLK}],    1 883-1889. 

AeXrlov  dpxai'O'^.o'yLKov,  1888;  1889  (index) ;  1S90,  p.  I- 144. 
' A0r]vaLov,  I-IO. 
Revue  archeologique,  1-91. 


65 


BOOKS  OF  REFERENCE. 

Pape-Benseler,  Woerterbuch   der  griechischen   Eigenna- 

men. 
Ross,  Demen  von  Attika. 
Rangabes,  Antiquites  helleniques. 
Meursius,  De  populis  Atticis. 
Leake,  The  Topography  of  Athens. 
Hanriot,  Recherches  sur  la  topographic    des   demes  de 

I'Attique. 
Hicks,  Greek  Historical  Inscriptions. 
Thirhvall,  History  of  Greece. 
Grote,  History  of  Greece. 
Toepffer,  Attische  Genealogie. 
Schaefer,  Demosthenes  und  seine  Zeit. 
Blass,  Die  attische  Beredsamkeit. 
Jebb,  The  Attic  Orators. 
Dumont,  Essai  sur  I'ephebie  attique. 
Boeckh,    Urkunden    ueber    das    Seewesen    des  attischen 

Staates. 
Boeckh,  Die  Staatshaushaltung  der  Athener. 


66 


Statement  of  the  educational  institutions  the  author 
has  attended,  and  a  list  of  the  degrees  and  honors  con- 
ferred upon  him  : 

Everson    and    Halsej^'s    Collegiate   School,  New  York, 

1 879- 1 884. 
School    of    Arts,   Columbia   College,   New  York,  1884- 

1891. 
A.B.,  June  1888,  Columbia  College. 
A.M.,  June  1889,  Columbia  College. 
Prize  Fellowship  in  Greek,  1 888-1 891. 
Alumni    Prize    "to   the    most    faithful    and     deserving 

student  in  the  graduating  class  ",  1888. 


67 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 


Form  L-9-15?7!-7,'32 


UNIVERSITY  of  CAUF^  >^INI A 


LOS  ANGELiiia 
TJBR-AiJy 


^87      Younu   - 
-E6Y8^_Jrchi^^^ 

derae    of 
Attica, 


UC  SOlJTHpR.;  pf 


^^000  529  039 


lip" 


